can i speak for the president and what's happening on the -- i can speak for the president and what's happening now. the president federalized the national guard. our united states marines and national guards men and women on the ground right now are helping to create a peaceful environment for i.c.e. and border patrol who were being, again, hailed with rocks, violently and viciously attacked. they needed re-enforcements. our united states marines who are on the ground are providing those re-enforcements to ensure the environment is peaceful so that these raids and deportation can continue. reporter: he realizes they can't arrest people unless he invokes the insurrection act. which was not seemingly in secretary noem's- karoline: are you are trying to conflate a letter sent to the department of homeland security. the president understands the legal authority he invoked. that's the current situation right now. reporter: when it comes to federalizing the national guard. what is the specific criteria the president is using -- >> we'll break away from this and get you live to the house

for legislative business. >> mes. the secretary: i have been directed by the senate that the senate has passed s.1136 to authorize criminal sentence and concurrence of the house is requested. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? >> pursuant to house resolution 48 # i call up the bill senate 331 and ask for its immediate consideration in the house. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: senate 331 and for other purposes. pursuant to house rule 489. the bill is considered read and bill debatable equally divided and controlled by the committee of energy and commerce or

respective designee. the gentleman from virginia, mr. griffith and the gentleman from new jersey mr. pallone each will control 30 minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from virginia. mr.griffith: i ask unanimous consent that all members may extend their remarks on the legislation and to insert extraneous materials on s.331. the speaker pro tempore: without objection mr.griffith: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. griffith: unfortunately most everyone in this room knows about the drug overdoses. there were more than 107,000 overdose death that is occurred in the united states. these staggering numbers are due in large part to the increasing presence of fentanyl and fentanyl analogs approximately 100 times more potent than

morphine. and 50 times more than heroin. the lethal dose of fentanyl is just two milligrams, about four grains of sand. a loophole that the cartels have tried to use to traffic their illicit fentanyl until our country is by changing one part of fentanyl's chemical structure to create fentanyl analogs. the cartels did this in an attempt to evade our criminal laws. right now, fentanyl analogs are considered schedule one substances. but only because of a series of temporary scheduling orders and that order is now set to expire on september 30 of this year. that is why the halt fentanyl act led by myself and my friend, the gentleman from ohio, mr. latta in the house, and senators cassidy and heinrich in the senate is critically needed. this bill aims to curb overdose deaths by permanently, permanently scheduling fentanyl

analogs as schedule one substances, mr. speaker. this will strengthen the law enforcement's ability to prosecute fentanyl traffickers and act as a deterrent. the halt fentanyl act promotes research by improving the registration process so eligible individuals can conduct studies on schedule one substances with the appropriate safeguards. in the energy and commerce committee, we have heard there may be as many as 4,800 analogs. my understand is experts at n.i.h. and f.d.a. and other agencies have studied roughly 30 of those 4,800 analogs. by encourage research of schedule one substances like fentanyl analog, we can better understand how these substances work and how we can prevent potentially harmful impacts in the future. the tell pore rare bans, mr. speaker -- temporary bans, mr. speaker, did not deal with the

research component. without this bill we cannot legally do the research on the analogs that may someday be found to have medical benefits. because fentanyl itself has a proven medical use, it is considered a schedule 2 drug. but illicit derivatives of fentanyl currently have no demonstrated medical value. let me be clear, this bill will have no impact whatsoever on the physician's ability to administer fentanyl in medical settings. halt deals specifically with fentanyl analogs not medicinal fentanyl. we must address this bipartisan issue immediately and not allow this temporary extension to expire in september. once they are permanently placed into schedule one, congress will continue to build off this work to continue to address the illicit fentanyl crisis in our country. according to a 2021 g.a.o. report there was a 930% decrease

this these fentanyl analogs coming into the country the year they were placed temporarily into schedule one. this billle is a critical step in combat -- bill is a contract cal step -- critical step because china and mexico are heavily involved in the business. china sends the precursors of fentanyl and fentanyl analogs, the a.p.i., to the cartels in mexico who are then making the drugs and bringing it across our borders. by making these analogs permanently schedule one, it removes the incentive to traffic these drugs into our country due to the penalties if you are caught. china has even realized the risk of fentanyl analogs themselves and permanently scheduled these analogs on their strictest schedule. other countries have followed suit and done the same. this bill received bipartisan support on the house floor with a vote of 312-108 in february. the bill has the support of many

law enforcement agencies and other entities calling for the need to pass the bill. with passage of this version of the bill, it will be sent to the president's desk and i am hopeful the president will sign this bill into law quickly so that we can continue to combat this crisis and begin research in earnest to see if there is any benefit from any of the analog that is may help people who are -- analogs that may help people who are invoked. i urge all of my colleagues to support senate 331, the halt fentanyl act. mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia reserves. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. pallone: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in opposition to s.331, the halt fentanyl act. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. mr. speaker, the house approved this bill in february.

and since that time the trump administration has set its sites on dismantling our nation's public health infrastructure, including the agency directly responsible for addressing mental health and substance abuse disorders. republicans are going to claim today that they are addressing the opioid overdose crisis with this bill. that this is nothing but a distraction from the fact that republicans continue to silently stand by and allow the trump administration to gut our public health agencies, republicans are also attempting to distract from the fact that last month they passed the largest cuts to health care in american history as part of their big ugly bill. republicans are stripping health care away from 16 million americans so they can give giant tax breaks to bilas and big corporations, two groups that don't need help right now. mr. speaker, over the last couple years we made significant progress in addressing the opioid overdose crisis. last year the centers for disease control and prevention announced a 24% decline in drug

overdose deaths for 129 months ending in september of 20 -- 12 months ending in september of 2024 compared to the previous year. this is encouraging but i'm deeply concerned that the trump administration's attacks on public health, coupled with republican attacks on american's health care will threaten these improvements. this permanently schedules fentanyl related substances on schedule one. this is based on a class definition disputed by scientists. i oppose this bill because it's a permanent extension instead of a temporary are one that we agreed on for two years at thenr appropriations package. that bipartisan package was pushed aside by speaker johnson after elon musk voiced his opposition to the overall package. the temporary option would have left the door opened for an off ramp for substances found to have potential medical applications this. republican bill would also exacerbate inequities in our criminal justice system because

drugs placed on schedule one include mandatory minimum sentencing. s.331 does not provide additional resources for prevention treatment, recovery, or harm reduction. so the bill is essentially recycling an incarceration first response to what i consider mainly a public health challenge. that's because republicans don't want to talk about this as a public health challenge. instead president trump and house republicans want to focus on piecemeal policies in hopes it will distract from their efforts to gut medicaid and drug treatment programs. republicans are sabotaging medicaid which will be devastating to people who struggle with mental health and substance use issues. medicaid is the single largest payer in the country for behavioral health services covering 40% of all americans with opioid use disorder. americans with substance use and mental health issues will face new barriers and red tape for signing up for and staying enrolled in the health insurance. house republicans will setting up new barriers and roadblocks to care that will unfortunately

result in our mental health and substance abuse crisis and only make it worse. republicans are silently standing by as the trump administration is moving forward with an unauthorized and illegal plan to eliminate the substance abuse and mental health services administration, better known as samhsa. samhsa's the very agency responsible for preventing substance use disorder. increasing access to treatment. and promoting recovery. it will be combined with other agencies that the trump administration doesn't care about under the banner of a larger make america healthy again office. and these critical programs to treat mental health and substance abuse will be deprioritized or eliminated in favor of cabinet member -- secretary r.f.k. jr.'s pet projects like destroying americans' access to vaccines. he's going to prioritize that and not samhsa and substance abuse treatment. congress has received zero information from the trump administration about how this

new office will work and how the work of samhsa to address the mental health and substance use treatment needs of our communities will be prioritized. i'd like to enter into the record, mr. speaker, if i could, i'd ask unanimous consent a letter from the nation's leading mental health and substance use treatment organizations. called the mental health liaison group. this letter is in strong opposition to the trump administration's efforts to eliminate samhsa as well as their efforts to drastically cut funding and eliminate critical samhsa programs. as they write -- the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. pallone: thank you, mr. speaker. as they write in this letter, i'll quote, these proposals would have, quote, devastating consequences for the 84.5 million americans with a mental health and substance use disorder, many of whom rely on samhsa's programs, research, oversight, and leadership to address critical mental health and substance use disorder needs. that's the end of the quote.

mr. speaker, the trump administration is also rescinding more than $1 billion in essential funding that states rely on through block grants. this rescission is wreaking havoc on states' efforts to support prevention, treatment, and recovery because states and counties and towns are the main places where these treatment programs are. my republican colleagues refuse to hold this administration to account for these devastating and illegal cuts. instead they are trying to distract with this bill. this bill is opposed by nearly 190 national, state, and local public health criminal justice and civil rights organizations. i oppose the bill and encourage my colleagues to oppose it as well. i don't want anyone to misunderstand. what i'm saying if you don't treat mental health and substance abuse as a public health crisis, instead you say we are going to throw everybody in jail. have mandatory sentences, and throw everybody -- lock the door, throw away the key. i don't think that's going to solve the problem. i will continue to highlight

that while republicans propose this mandatory sentences and want to make this a permanent -- put fentanyl permanently on the settle, that is not -- schedule, that is not the answer to this mental health crisis. it is not the answer. the answer is to provide adequate treatment, education, also to prevent the drugs from coming into the country, but not to just put people in jail and throw away the key. and with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey reserves. the gentleman from virginia. mr. griffith: i yield three minutes who helped lead the charge on this legislation for many years now, the gentleman from ohio, mr. latta. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio is recognized. mr. latta: i thank my good friend for yielding time to me. for over four years i worked to

pass the halt fentanyl act. in 2023, we saw over 107,000 overdose, 75,000 attributed to synthetic opioids. currently, fentanyl and fentanyl anna logs fall under schedule 1 of the controlled substances act due to a temporary scheduling order that runs through september 30 of this year. this bill would permanently place fentanyl anna logs into schedule 1 of the c.s.a. a schedule 1 controlled substance is a drug, substance or chemical that has high potential for abuse, has no currently accepted medical value and subject to regulatory controls and administrative civil and criminal penalties. today, this chamber is

permanently scheduling controlled substances at scheduled one. we owe it to our families, communities and victims. cartels are literally killing americans for 10 cents. among teens, fentanyl poisoning accounted for an average of 22 deaths per week in 2022. fentanyl is the number one cause of death among adults 18-49 more than cancer, heart disease and car accidents. this isn't about criminal justice reform but about victims getting justice. currently, to trigger a 10 year mandatory minimum, an offense must involve 100 or more grams containing a fentanyl analog. 100 grams of fentanyl analog can kill 50,000 people. i thank our senate colleagues

for passing this critical legislation and i urge my colleagues to support this bill and get it to the president's desk and stop the greatest poisoning in american history. i yield become. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. pallone: i yield myself such time as i may consume. mr. speaker, house republicans think we can schedule our way out of this crisis but refuse to pass bipartisan solutions that suggest prevention and treatment to help overcome overdose deaths he. all the programs under the support act that helped treatment, helped with treatment and education caused the number of overdose deaths are being gutted and the staff that

administer them and samhsa, all these things are being eliminated or gutted or the funding frozen by the trump administration. this isn't just a criminal justice issue. we must combat this opioid crisis through a multi prong approach. nearly half of the people in prison have been convicted of a dug related offense with a racial disparity. access to treatment remains a challenge today. in 2023, according to samhsa, one quarter of the people who were classified as needing substance use treatment received it in the last year and people with a substance use disorder are eight times to die of an overdose compared to those who receive medication treatment. putting people away and throwing away the key is not the answer. and cutting programs under samhsa is going to make things

worse. i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia is recognizedded. mr. griffith: i recognize two minutes speaking on the measure, the chairman of the energy and commerce committee, the gentleman from kentucky. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from kentucky. mr.guthrie: i appreciate the gentleman for yielding. you are not going to solve this problem -- it's not the answer to the problem or solve this problem by putting people in jail and throwing away the key. i will tell you there are people of purveyors of this illicit fentanyl deserve to be in jail and throw away. and we have people who testified that their child took aderol and laced with fentanyl. not that they had addiction issues. there are people selling this and creating it and growing it

and creating it chemically. so what we do on the energy and commerce committee and we are doing the halt fentanyl act to address the criminal justice side of it. we have to address the issues of people who are suffering from substance use and did it in the support act and had 350 votes on the floor and broadly bipartisan on the floor of the house. and we are committed to ensuring that people have access to treatment. but we are equally committed to ensuring that people that are purchase viaing this poison on our communities our cities bringing it across the border deserve to have their day in court, deserve to answer to justice and deserve if it be the case if these are the people poisoning our children they should be put in jail and key thrown away. the committee would not

apologize for that. it takes all of the above approach on this issue and we are willing to do all of the above approach and i ask my colleagues to support this bill. and it is extremely important. d.e.a. said they supports this and time we do it. and i ask this body to support it. and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time the gentleman from new jersey. mr. pallone: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chairman of our committee knows i have great respect for him, but the bottom line is this bill does not consider individual circumstances. it's not just people that are selling drugs. look, i totally agree with you if someone is selling fentanyl, it's a totally different situation than someone who is arrested for possessing it. but the fact of the matter is, this bill covers both, those who

possess it and those selling it and maybe who have a huge ring of selling it. my point is when you have mandatory minimums all those people come under the same rubrick. and the legislation -- because it now makes permanent fentanyl on the schedule one, the mandatory minimums apply and the harsh penalties do not consider individual circumstances. i don't want to keep repeating but i will how there is no prevention or treatment and just locks people up. but the point is you are going to have families and communities that because of the minimum sentencing and inability of the judge to look at the individual circumstances, that we are going to repeat the same mistakes that we've made for many years responding to other drugs.

right flow we know people of color have been disproportionately incarcerated and sentenced to and da tower minimum sentences and racial disparity can be see in prosecution of fentanyl and fentanyl analogs. the sentencing commission from 2021 to 2023 provides strong evidence that they disproportionately target people of color. i would like to get beyond the point when we debate by saying mandatory sentencing is a good thing whether you are charged with possession, selling or how much you are selling, but that's not there are no individual circumstances considered and we know the consequences of that for people in many cases who in my opinion if i was the judge would not impose these harsh mandatory minimums. but i reserve.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey reserves. the gentleman from virginia. mr. griffith: i yield to the gentleman from florida for two minutes. mr. bilirakis: i want to thank the gentleman from virginia who is the original sponsor along with bob latta from the state of ohio. this is a very, very important bill. and i strongly urge that the house pass this particular bill. for far too long our communities have been plagued from poisonings from fentanyl and fentanyl-related substances. every one of our congressional districts have been affected. kids are dying, folks. and we've got to make this permanent. illicit drugs have powered across the border, made it on the streets and affected our communities. every one of our communities.

they are often mixed with other illicit dugs and users are unaware of the presence and potent effects, which makes the danger even harder to stop. you hear stories on a regular basis where kids go out and party and shouldn't be using recreational drugs, but they don't deserve to die. you heard the example just today by our chairman with regard to some of these drugs, you can say marijuana, what have you and other drugs and kids should not be using these drugs, but they don't deserve to die. they are laced with fentanyl. awful for the kids and also tore the families and the friends of the kids. we must ensure law enforcement has the tools it needs to

address these threats and that's what we are doing today. the halt fentanyl will permanently schedule fentanyl as a class one drug. this is long overdue. and i know my good friend, mr. griffith, and mr. latta, have been working on this for years. this must pass the united states senate after we get it out of the today. thank you. we need to save lives. that's the bottom line. mr. griffith: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey. mr. pallone: i continue to reserve. i think my colleague has more speakers. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. griffith: i now recognize the chairman of the health subcommittee, the gentleman from georgia, mr. carter, for two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized mr. carter: i thank the gentleman for yielding. i rise in strong support of the halt fentanyl act which permanently extends president trump's 2018 schedule one

classification of fentanyl related substances. mr. speaker, united states is facing a poisoning epidemic. and its calls by illicit fentanyl and related substances that are pouring into our borders. in 2023 under the biden administration 107,000 people died of drug overdoses. 75,000 died from synthetic opioids, largely illicit fentanyl or fentanyl related substances. a family from georgia lost their two sons, 22-year-old and 19-year-old to fentanyl poisoning. we cannot allow this lawlessness and tragedy to tear our families apart. we must crack down on traffickers. president trump has made progress by securing our borders and congress must support him in this critical effort.

we must pass the halt fentanyl act that is before us today. let's pass this bill. secure our borders. stem the tide of the growing crisis and save lives. again, mr. speaker, this is fentanyl poisoning. we are not talking about addiction, but one pill that poisons and kills people. and that's what we are trying to prevent here. thank you. and i yield become. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time the gentleman from virginia reserves. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. pallone: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the gentleman is recognized mr. pallone: again, mr. speaker, i listened to what the chairman of our health subcommittee said and i'm not arguing with him that we have to look at the fentanyl crisis in many ways particularly at the border and prevent it from coming into the country from china and other places that flood this country with it, but my point is what we

are hearing from the trump administration and from the secretary of h.h.s., i reserve thebalance of my time. earth kennedy junior, is that we are going to defund substance use disorder programs, mental health programs and treatment. the fact of the matter is 58% of the people in prison now have a substance use disorder. people with these disorders have challenges getting appropriate treatment and often incarceration exascerbates these symptoms. putting more people in prison who are only there because of mandatory sentence of fentanyl and analogs it exascerbates their the situation and don't get the treatment. and the congressional justification for and the trump administration's for a healthy america, h.h.s., the agency, to cut various

substance use and mental health programs helping state and local health departments to combat the opiate crisis is. for fiscal year 2026, the department of health and human services proposes a zero out state opioid response grants. the community mental health service block grant. the first responder training. youth prevention and recovery programs. and many, many more. i talked about this recently. the bottom line is if you zero out these programs, think it's over $1 billion that's already been frozen. are you going to have nothing locally. you will have no opportunity locally to actually help people with treatment and education. and all are you are going to do you now is just throw them in -- all you are are going to do now is throw them in prison which exacerbates the problem. in the president's budget they proto is the samhsa to help those in needs and programs that help prevent americans from controlled substances. the president budget also calls for reducing opiate overdose

prevention and surveillance by $29 million. i think that every dollar that's cut for prevention, for treatment, for education is a life that's left unprotected. terminating these critical programs and offices puts millions of lifes battling substance abuse in jeopardy. i wish my colleagues would spend as much time on these issues in protecting public health and solutions instead of a bill that prioritizes this criminal justice approach which i think doesn't work. i reserve the balance of my t time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. griffith: mr. speaker, i now yield two minutes to the gentleman from california, mr. obernolte. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. obernolte: mr. speaker, i rise in strong support of s.331, the halt fentanyl act. mr. speaker, opioid overdoses have become a epidemic in this country. last year over 100,000 americans lost their lives to overdose,

and fentanyl poisoning is the driving force behind that. mr. speaker, it is not just the country at large that's experienced this problem. in my own district we have seen an over 1,000% increase in the rate of fentanyl poisoning and deaths. mr. speaker, i had the most difficult day in my over 20 years in public office recently when hi to console one of my constituents, a mother who lost both of her sons in the same day to the same fentanyl poisoning event. we must give our law enforcement the tools to combat this problem. this bill does exactly that. it permanently reschedules fentanyl and its analogs as a schedule one narcotics. and gives our law enforcement agencies the tools they need to begin dealing with this problem. that's why i'm proud to be a co-sponsor of the house version of this legislation. i urge my colleagues to vote in support of it. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from virginia reserves. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. pallone: i was going to continue to reserve. does the gentleman have

additional speakers? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey reserves. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. griffith: mr. speaker, i now yield to the gentleman from wisconsin, mr. fitzgerald, two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. fitzgerald: thank you, mr. speaker. thank you to chairman guthrie and congressman griffith for your leadership on the issue. this is a historic moment, mr. speaker. house republicans are delivering on a promise to stop the flow of deadly fentanyl that for years has been flooding our communities and tragically tearing families apart. today, drug overdose is the leading cause of accidental death across the country, and fentanyl driven overdoses are are leading -- are the leading cause of death for american adults between 18 and 45 years of age. that's because it's cheap to make. easy to transport. and so potent just a few milligrams can be lethal.

addressing the threat of these substances has been a top priority not only for myself, but for many other colleagues in this house. it's hard for me to believe what i'm hearing from the minority right now. one of the first pieces of legislation that we introduced in the 117th congress was stopping over-- the overdose of fentanyl analogs act. sofa is the same acronym as an organization started by laurie of wisconsin. saving others for archie. archie was her son. she has worked to raise awareness of the dangers of drug addiction throughout wisconsin following the loss of her son to a fentanyl overdose. mr. speaker, i'd like to personally recognize the work of laurie as well as dr. timothy weslake of walk saw, wisconsin, for spearheading legislation in the wisconsin state legislature that culminated in the bill being debated before us today.

since 2017 they have been working on a permanent solution and that is scheduling fentanyl as a substance one item. it is the most important thing that this house of representatives will do in this congress. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. pallone: yes, mr. speaker. i yield three minutes to the gentleman from colorado who is our assistant majority leader. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado -- mr. neguse: i thank the gentleman. i want to first say thank to you the ranking member for his leadership in addressing the scourge of fentanyl overdoses across our country. i serve as one of the co-chairs of the bipartisan fentanyl prevention trafficking caucus with representative issa and

representative madeleine dean. it's certainly an issue that we have worked tirelessly on and appreciate the bipartisan cooperation notwithstanding obviously the disagreements with respect to this particular bill. i think the ranking member has spoken eloquently with respect to his concerns. i want to say thank you for the ranking member indulging me in giving me a few minutes to speak on the floor because at the conclusion of this debate i intend to make a unanimous consent request of the chair and i would hope that it's a consent request that everyone in this house could agree to, as many of my colleagues of course are well aware, there was a terrible, heinous terror attack in my district 10 days ago in boulder, colorado. we have introduced a resolution, h.r. 481, it's a bipartisan resolution. several of my republican are colleagues have joined me on this resolution. it denounces anti-semitism, condemns the horrific attack in my community. lifts up the organization. run for their lives, which was a

heinously targeted by this terrorist. this is an organization that's been working every week to peacefully call for the release of the hostages held by hamas in gaza. i'm simply asking for this house to consider my resolution. this terrible attack happened in my district. i have no doubt that if republican leadership just puts the resolution on the floor it will pass unanimously in this house. i have no doubt. so aim just asking my colleagues to -- i'm just asking my colleagues to give us the opportunity to weigh in. or at least explain to us and my constituents why this resolution that honors law enforcement, that honors the f.b.i. and the boulder police department that acted so swiftly in response to this terrorist attack, why my community is being deprived of that opportunity. i hope -- i know my colleagues -- i know mr. griffith in particular. i know him to be somebody who

shares i believe my views as i have articulated them with respect to this particular attack. and would just hope that everyone would agree to give this resolution its due course. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from new jersey reserves. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. griffith: mr. speaker, i now recognize for two minutes the vice chairman of the energy and commerce committee, the gentleman from pennsylvania, dr. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. joyce: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, today i rise in strong support of the halt fentanyl act. critical legislation to crack down on the criminals who produce, who traffic, and who sell fentanyl and fentanyl related substances. earlier this year we were able to hear powerful testimony from two of my constituents. ray and deb collin who tragically lost their son's act to fentanyl poisoning. unfortunately, they are not

alone in this pathway to pain. last year one pennsylvanian died from an overdose every two hours. with the overwhelming majority of those who passed resulting from fentanyl poisoning. we owe it to our future generations to end this plague, this plague on -- plague, this playing on our society. our courageous border patrol and law enforcement officers will be more effective in removing fentanyl and fentanyl related you substances that come across our border and end up in our community, poisoning our children, our friends, our neighbors. additionally, this legislation will also result in harsher penalties for the criminals anti-cartel members -- and the cartel members who are responsible for the spread of this poison. as a nation we can no longer sit by while future generations of american workers, parents, and

community leaders are taken away from us. i encourage my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this legislation today and to save the lives of so many throughout this great country. it is time to halt fentanyl. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from virginia reserves. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. pallone: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized mr. pallone: thank you, mr. speaker. we have this bill in the house back in february. and then it went to the senate. and essentially what came back today for final approval, or final passage is the same bill. as was mentioned by my republican colleagues, if it passes today it goes straight to the president's desk. but at the time in february when we were discussing this bill, i had pointed out that president

trump had just pushed a scheme really straight out of project 2025 to choke off virtually all federal funding, including halting over $8.6 in grant funding for the federal programs to combat the opioid crisis. at the time the congressional republicans just stood by silently as it happened. he halted over, trump, halted over $6.5 billion in funding for the substance abuse and mental health services, samhsa, which supports treatment programs and prevention efforts. he also halted nearly $1.5 billion in funding for the national institutes of health, drug abuse, and addiction research programs which conduct and support research on substance abuse and addiction, basically to better understand the caughts of ai diction -- causes of addiction and identify treatments and intervention that is reduce overdoses. trump also halted all federally funded programs that provide critical opioid related

services, including federally qualified health centers, which serve a high proportion of patients disproportionately impacted by the opioid crisis. and the department of health and human services also eliminated the workforce training programs, including the integrated substance abuse disorder training program, which trains professionals to provide opioid treatment and recovery services. a lot of these things we went to court and many of them were overturned. but i don't want anyone to understand or to think that the president is giving up. he's going to continue his efforts to illegally cut these programs and i mentioned some of them before. and again, the house republicans are doing nothing to halt any of this. in addition to that, i have to say the big ugly bill which was passed a couple weeks ago by the republicans makes about i think

all together between medicaid, the a.c.a., and medicare because of sequestration, cuts about -- i would say 1.7 trillion dollars. and understand that medicaid is the single largest payer for behavioral services in the united states and covers nearly 40% of all individuals with opioid use disorder. it covers a full array of services and supports for people with behavioral health needs. including services that supports typically not covered by other health programs. this is an assault on every effort for prevention and treatment of opioid disorders, whether it's cutting medicaid, whether it's eliminating samhsa's programs, cutting the money that goes back to states and towns to help people with treatment. so again, it's a -- this bill is a distraction because it gives the impression that if you lock

somebody up with mandatory penalty, even if it's just for possession, and throw away the key, that will solve your problem. it's not. everything that the president is doing and the republicans are doing to support him eliminates, if not completely eliminates, cuts back significantly on the treatment and education that are much -- going to be much more important in terms of trying to save people's lives. with that, i'll reserve the balance of my time, mr. speaker. .. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia. ingly recognize mr. joyce of ohio for two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. joyce: i rise today in strong support of senate bill 331, the halt fentanyl act. this bill will save lives by providing tools for law

enforcement to come pat the opioid crisis across america. thousands continue to die from fentanyl overdoses and ohio has been particularly hard hit. prior to rescheduling in 2018, fentanyl-related substances could only be controlled individually, allowing them to create new fentanyl related compounds. the prevalence of fentanyl-related substances and continued trafficking of dangerous markets across our southern border requires strong, decisive action from our congress. according to the d.e.a., there were more than 36 million fentanyl pills and nearly 4,000 pounds of fentanyl powder seized in 2025. this represents over 157 million deadly doses. as a former prosecutor and co-chair of the addiction and recovery crisis, i understand

law enforcement aggressively targeting traffickers and making sure we're addressing societal challenges of addiction. each life lost to an overdose is a tragedy. we must declare war on the drugs killing our kits and our community. i encourage my colleagues to support this bill and send it to the president's desk. thank you and i yield pack. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from virginia. >> i reserve, i'm prepared to close but i'm curious how much time each side has. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia has 10 1/2 minutes remaining. the gentleman from new jersey has 10 minutes remaining. mr. pallone: you're prepared to close? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia reserves. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. pallone: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. as i mentioned before, the bill before us today is the senate companion to h.r. 27 which we voted on here in the house on february 6 of this year. but the two bills are identical

other than a couple of minor punctuation differences so this bill would go to the president's desk and he said he would sign it. but since that vote in february here in the house the trump administration has seriously threatened our nation's ability to confront the ongoing opioid overdose crisis by attempting to dismantle the substance abuse and mental health service administration, samhsa, firing hundreds of workers include keying officials and rescinding over $1 million from state and local programs. i continue to oppose this bill because it's a permanent extension of fentanyl related substances as a schedule one drug, instead of this temporary one for two years as we agreed on. the temporary option would have left an offramp for substances found to have potential medical applications. this bill would also exacerbate

inequities in the criminal justice system because drugs placed on schedule one include mandatory minimum sentences. so s. 331 doesn't provide options for treatment recovery or harm reduction. for these reasons i encourage my colleagues to vote no on the legislation. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey yields back. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. >> i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. griffith: this is an identical bill to one that passed out of the house. there are a few technical changes the senate made, including sticking their number on it instead of the house number but it's essentially the same bill this house passed frankly with bipartisan support. i understand the gentleman's objections related to mandatory minimum sentences but that's a different bill, a different day. that's not what this bill is about. this bill is about making

fentanyl analog, schedule one or making all of them schedule one substances. the gentleman referenced that there's no offramp. i would suggest to him that the offramp is in the eye of the beholder. what we did in this bill, i think it's something that everybody on the floor can be proud of, is we put into this bill the capability to do extensive research by our research universities, by the n.i.h., we created a framework to do research on the 4,800 believed analogs of fentanyl. i believe it has two advantages. one, if we find one of these analogs that has no harm and even has a positive for some issue, that creates your offramp. there's already an offramp in the law for drugs that show promise, that have a medicinal benefit. that opens up other statutes.

this one doesn't have that offramp. other statutes do that would allow, if somebody comes in and says look at what this does, it does good things in x area or the y area or whatever. this bill has the component parts to make that possible. unlike our schedule one on marijuana which never allowed research, or realistic research, and created some of the dilemmas we have today with that substance, we fixed that with this bill. secondly that research component, i believe if there's any benefit in the analogs at all, it may be that one of the analogs, i'm not saying it will, i think the odds are slim, but it is possible that one of the analogs will have a blocking effect on the deadly aspects of fentanyl itself. and that would be a huge positive. so when my colleague says it has nothing on, you know, dealing with the problem as far as people who have an addiction, he's right. not today.

but that research component has great potential for the future. in the short run, we stop the chinese bringing the precursors to mexico and the mexican cartel crease ating new and willings and trying to get around our laws by claiming it's not really fentanyl, it's an analog. we stop those attempts by the bad guys, the illegal people, trying to to bring this into our country and bringing it in unfortunately successfully. we stop it. we stop them using that technique to get around the law. and then we leave the door open for positive future benefits if any in the analogs. i'm proud to have helped draft this legislation. i'm proud to have drafted the part on the research component, and i am proud that not withstanding the fact they made a few tweaks and sent back a senate bill similar to mine and

mr. latta's original bill, i'm proud to stand in support of the halt fentanyl act and i encourage all my colleagues in this house to vote yes, send it to the president's desk. let's make this a permanent law in the united states and make our kids just a little bit, as chairman guthrie said, it's not going to solve every pblem, but it make ours kids just a little bit safer. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: all time for debate has been yielded. pursuant to house resolution 49, the previous question is ordered on the bill. the question is on the third reading of the bill. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. third reading. the clerk: an act to amend the controlled substances act with respect to the scheduling of fentanyl related substances and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on passage of the bill. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no.

mr. pallone: i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: in the opinion of the chair the ayes have it. mr. pallone: mr. speaker, i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent that h.r. 481, my bipartisan resolution to condemn the terror attack in boulder and denounce anti-semitism by called for consideration by the full house. the speaker pro tempore: under the guidelines consistently issued by successive speakers as recorded in section 956 of the house rules and manual, the chair is constrained not to entertain the request unless it has been cleared by the bipartisan floor and committee

leaderships. for what purpose does the gentleman seek recognition? mr. neguse: my understanding of the manual is that the speaker has the power to -- parliamentary inquiry, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman will state his inquery. mr. me ambiguous: my understanding under the jefferson's manual is that the speaker has the ability to disclose in the congressional record the source of the objection, the minority leader, the minority does not object to this unanimous consent request. will the speaker tell the house and the american public is it speaker johnson that opposes this? who opposes unanimous consent to this resolution denouncing the attack. the speaker pro tempore: as indicated in section 956 of the house rules and manual it is not a proper parliamentary inquiry to ask the chair to indicate which side has failed under the speaker's guidelines to declare a unanimous consent request.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from kentucky, mr. comer, seek

recognition? mr. comer: mr. speaker, pursuant to house resolution 489, i call up the bill house resolution 2056, the district of columbia federal immigration compliance act of 2025 and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman intend to call up h.r. 2056? mr. comer: h.r. 2056. the speaker pro tempore: thank you. the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: union calendar number 100, h.r. 2056, a bill to require the district of columbia to comply with federal immigration laws. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house resolution 489, the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the committee on oversight and government reform printed in the bill, modified by the amendment printed in house report 119-151,

as adopt and the bill as amended is considered read. the bill shall be debatable for one hour, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on oversight and government reform or their respective designee. the gentleman from kentucky, mrm massachusetts, mr. lynch, each will control 30 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from kentucky, mr. comer. mr. comer: i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the measure under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. comer: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. comer: i rise in support of h.r. 2056, the district of columbia federal immigration compliance act. the committee has held multiple hearings on the failure they was biden-harris administration to secure our borders and protect our citizens. in march we heard from sanctuary

city mayors who offered carefully crafted statements not to work with the trump administration as it works to remove criminal aliens as quickly as possible. at the end of the day, illegal alien criminals who threaten our communities have no right to be here in the first place. state and local governments must work with the department of homeland security to share information on individuals they arrest. they must also honor lawful detainers. when they do not, congress must act. h.r. 2056 ensures that the district of columbia cooperates with federal immigration agencies including i.c.e., to protect our citizens, and nullifies priorities by the district to make itself a sanctuary city. i want to mention mr. higgins of louisiana for his work on this important topic. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kentucky reserves. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized.

mr. lynch: good afternoon, mr. speaker. i strongly oppose h.r. 2056 which would effectively nullify laws, policy, and practices duly enacted by the district of columbia. because i strongly support the ability of the residents of the district of columbia to govern themselves on local matters. this is one of two d.c. bills that the house is considering this week to demonize immigrants. let's be clear, the district of columbia is in full compliance with federal law. it does not obstruct i.c.e. from carrying out its duties. d.c., like many other jurisdiction, limits its cooperation with federal immigration agencies to what federal law actually requires. why do jurisdictions limit such cooperation other than the fact that immigration is a federal responsibility? let us ask the police chiefs for

an explanation. the major cities chief association opposes such cooperation for four reasons. and i will quote them. enforcement of routine civil immigration by police would undermine the trust and cooperation with immigrant communities which are essential elements of community oriented policing. courts have held that the lack of legal authority to enforce federal civil immigrates grace constitutes exposes local police to liability for unlawful arrests and detention. local agencies do not possess adequate resources to enforce these laws in addition to the added responsibility of homeland security and others. immigration laws are very complex and training required to understand them and to properly prosecute them significantly distracts from the core mission of local police to create safe communities.

and i close quote. let's be clear, again, d.c. is in full compliance with federal law. it does not obstruct i.c.e. from carrying out its duties. and it is backed by evidence demonstrating that limiting cooperation keeps people safer. counties with laws that do not honor extra judicial civil detainers had significantly lower levels of violent crimes than counties that don't have such laws. mayors, police chiefs, sheriffs, andle local leaders across the country have made clear that the way to combat violent crime is allowing local police to do their jobs of ensuring public safety in their own communities. not commandeering local police to spend limited time and resources rounding up and detaining nonviolent immigrants who pose no threat. forcing the district of columbia to carry out the federal government's immigration duties also discourages residents from coming forward to share

information with the police about violent crimes for fear that they are or someone close to them will be detained or deported. this is simply bad policy and hurt the residents of the district of columbia. the house should reject h.r. 2056 and stop interfering in local d.c. matters. i stead -- instead, it should pass the d.c. local funds act and h.r. 51, the d.c. statehood bill. with that, mr. speaker, i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts reserves. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized mr. comber: mr. speaker, i yield five minutes to the gentleman from louisiana, the sponsor of the bill, mr. higgins. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from louisiana is recognized for five minutes. mr. higgins: thank you, mr. speaker. let's have a candid conversation if we could. my colleagues across the aisle. congress, america, we need to clarify, for citizens watching,

mr. speaker, congress has the unique authority and therefore responsibility for our nation's capital as opposed to other municipalities across the country. why not phoenix, new orleans, atlanta, etc. because it's not the nation's capital, that's why. it's not reflected in the responsibilities that are enumerated for congress for the district of columbia for our nation's capital. so with the pendulum swings of majority control that we observe in our nation, from democrat majority to republican majority, my democrat colleagues feel responsible to make changes when they have the majority as do we. and when we had democrat control in recent years since i have been in congress, the democrats supported and did not oppose

some policy and legislative decisions at the municipal level in our nation's capital that we knew would injure our nation's capital in the realm of law enforcement. that's where we are. republicans have majority control in the house, senate, white house so of course we are going to respond to the threat that we face within our nation's capital towards law enforcement. this is how simple this bill s this is my bill. it requires the district of columbia to comply with federal immigration law. what's wrong with that, mr. speaker? my colleague says he stated two or three times in his opening statement, that the district of columbia does not obstruct federal law enforcement. that's not true. read between the lines, america,

when he says they do not obstruct, it means they don't physically stop i.c.e. from executing a warrant. but what he's not saying, mr. speaker, is that the district of columbia does not comply with federal immigration law enforcement warrant detainers, which is the safest, most widely accepted means by which a human being that's in the custody of one jurisdictional authority is transferred to another jurisdictional authority safely and within the parameters of the law for the benefit of the individual and the community. d.c. doesn't do that for federal immigration detainers. if they have somebody in custody, mr. speaker, for whatever purposes, and that guy has a warrant for i.c.e., they know that there is a warrant for that man.

and under normal circumstances that -- the custody of that individual will be transferred safely once the district of columbia was finished with that individual. they don't do that with i.c.e. they subject their communities to dangerous circumstances and law enforcement to absolutely unnecessary danger. so my bill just mandates that the district of columbia, the one city that congress has authority and therefore responsibility to be involved with things like this, and we shouldn't have to have this law. why? because the district of columbia should be following the federal law in the first place. we shouldn't have to bring this to the floor. we shouldn't have to engage in this debate. i shouldn't have to explain these things. but we are going to by god, require that our nation's capital comply with our nation's

federal law. so i encourage my colleagues to take a deep breath and step back and say yes, our nation's capital will be subject to the very laws that this body passes. i appreciate the chairman's advocacy for my bill. i encourage my colleagues to support it. i yield the balance of my time, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from kentucky reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. lynch: so let's take up that challenge. let's take up that challenge. let's make sure the laws that we have passed in this house apply in our -- and are complied with in washington, d.c. the gentleman may forget, this isn't the first debate we have had about washington, d.c., or the district of columbia. we have had this debate through

history. every since the founders of this country created the district. it's a special district in addition to being our national capital. and most recently in 1973, this congress, this congress created the washington d.c. home rule act. i will explain to the gentleman what that requires. the home rule act in d.c. says because there is shared jurisdiction within this district, that the people of washington, d.c., the residents here, may govern their local affairs as they please. as they please. the local affairs. and the performance of their local police force is an area within their local control. that's number one. so, let's apply, let's enforce

the laws that have been passed in this house respective to the people of the district of columbia. number two, violent crime. the special circumstances about keeping washington, d.c., safe. violent crime in d.c. reached a 30-year low this year. this past year. a 30-year low. compare that to any city in the country and it's a favorable comparison. the police department in washington, d.c., is doing an amazing job. and the leadership, the political leadership of d.c. has stepped up. there were years, many years ago, when there were deep and serious questions about the leadership in washington, d.c. they have improved dramatically over the last few decades.

this year violent crime in d.c. is down 22% compared to the same period last year. and studies show that handling law enforcement the way they have, with community policing and getting to know the people in the neighborhoods, has been a key element. this is according to the last five police chiefs in this city that spans over about 50 years. this is what they say, that this is the way to keep the people safe. work with the local community. and i know the gentleman is from law enforcement. and i'm just asking to afford the same respect and deference to our local law enforcement leaders here in this community. give them the benefit of the doubt of how they provide safety in their own city. they know it best. they know the people, they know

the streets, they know the challenges. it's a special place. this' a protest every couple of days, a major one in this city. people for various causes march into the is city, take it over. and the local law enforcement has to be part of that effort to keep those people safe so they can express their rights. it's a special place. but i think we should give deference to the local law enforcement community that they know how best to provide that safety. especially with the record that they have got. a 30-year low on crime in this city. 22% less violent crime this year compared to the same period last year. and the gentleman's closing argument was correct, he shouldn't have to bring a bill up here to do this. he shouldn't have to interfere with local control in this city. he shouldn't have to bring a

bill up here to tell the local people how to run their city when congress has already in 1973 given them that power in the home rule act for wash washington, d.c. i shouldn't be here, either. i shouldn't have to defend that right that has already been granted by previous congresses. mr. speaker, i yield as much time as the gentlelady requires to the representative for the district of columbia, miss eleanor holmes norton. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. norton: i thank the gentleman for yielding. i strongly oppose this undemocratic anti-immigrant bill which would nullify laws, policies, and practices enacted by the locally elected district of columbia government. the over 700,000 d.c. residents,

majority of whom are black and brown, are capable and worthy of local self-government. i ask unanimous consent to enter into the record a letter from every member of d.c.'s locally elected legislature, the council, opposing this bill. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. norton: i ask unanimous consent to enter into the record a letter from d.c.'s locally elected attorney general, ryan schwab, opposing this bill. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. .. ms. norton: d.c. citizens are treatmented as second class by congress. they are required to pay taxes, serve on juries, register for selective service in the same manner as residents of the states. they have served in the military since revolutionary war which

was fought to end taxation without representation and to give consent to the governed. yet congress has denied them voting representation in congress and full local self-government over the past 200 years. last congress, 100 bills and amendments were introduced to repeal or block local d.c. laws and policies. this congress, 28 such bills and amendments already have been introduced. including bills to abolish the local elected d.c. government. three months ago, congress passed a bill that cut over $1 billion from the -- from the local d.c. budget which consists entirely of locally raised revenue. while congress has the authority to legislate on local d.c.

matters it does not have a duty to do so. in federalist 43, james madison said of d.c. residents, quote, a municipal legislature for local purposes derived from this -- from their own suffrages will of course be allowed them, close quote. in 1933, the supreme court held that, quote, there is no constitutional barrier to the delegation by congress to the district of columbia of full legislative power. close quote. the council has 13 members. if d.c. residents do not like the members' votes, residents can vote them out of office. or pass a ballot measure. this is called democracy. congress has 535 voting members.

none are elected by d.c. residents. if d.c. residents do not like how the members vote on local d.c. matters, residents cannot vote them out of office or pass a ballot measure. that is the antithesis of democracy. congress has the authority to grant d.c. residents voting representation in congress and full local self-government. it simply needs to pass h.r. 51. the d.c. statehood bill which would make the residential and commercial areas of d.c. a state. the admissions clause of the constitution gives congress the authority to admit new states. all 37 new states were admitted by an act of congress. the district clause of the constitution gives congress the

authority to reduce the size of the federal districts which it has previously done. the substance of h.r. 56 is irrelevant. since there is no justification for congress to legislate on local d.c. matters, but i will briefly discuss it. consistent with federal law, the position of the major cities chiefs association and d.c.'s values, d.c. limits cooperation with federal immigration agencies. d.c. concluded that cooperating with federal immigration agencies would make d.c. less safe for all residents by diverting police resources and discouraging immigrants from

interacting with the police department and other government agencies. many states, cities and counties have reached the same conclusion. i urge members to respect the will of d.c. residents by voting no, no, on this bill. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from massachusetts reserves. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. mr. comer: i yield three minutes to the gentleman from south carolina, mr. sim mince. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. timmons: i rise in support of this bill. i'm kind of disappointed in the debate right now my colleague from massachusetts is talking about how we have previously granted the authority to the district of columbia to do x, y, and z. he is correct.

but with us granting power, that comes responsibility. that come responsibility. my colleague from washington, d.c., is talking abhome rule and this and that. this city makes me sad. i mean, i have hope now. that president trump is here, the d.c. government is starting to do what they should have been doing all along. what apt representative cuellar who was robbed at gunpoint, carjacking. what about the rand paul staffer stabbed to death in the bar blocks from here. i don't go there anymore because it's not safe. what about brad finstad who got robbed at gunpoint. jus sis sotomayor's detail shot an 18-year-old 15 times because he was trying to rob the supreme court justice. in what world are you living in that you think the power we granted to the district of columbia is being executed responsibly? so here we are. we're talking about something

very simple. abide by federal detainers. if the federal government says you've arrested an illegal immigrant that has a criminal detainer you got to follow the law. we didn't give the billion dollars to the city of the district of columbia because they need to understand that actions have consequences. when i don't feel safe at night, when my constituents come here and i tell them to be careful, when my commanding officer stays at a hotel three blocks from here and i tell him do not walk to -- to the baseball game, taken a uber. what world are you living in? this is unacceptable. we will have law and order in this city. the president has said so much and we are going to use every tool now toolbox to make this city the world it should be. a capital, a nation's capital in decline is a nation in dede-cline. we are not a nation in decline. the city of d.c. needs to live

up to its obligations, keep us safe, get the homeless people, get them help. you're letting them live in the streets you're not helping them. you're hurting. get them mental health counseling, get them a shower, get them a job. letting them live under bridges is not helping them. it's wrong. it's wrong. and the fact they've to sit up here and tell you this, it makes me sad. we are going to make this city safe. we are going to show the world we are not a nation in decline. we are going to not only make america great again, we're going to make the united states capital great again. and with that, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from kentucky reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. lynch: let's talk about crime in d.c. let's talk about crime in d.c. as the gentleman mentioned. let's talk about that. let's talk about january 6. we had 1,500 people ransack the capitol. and let's talk about what

happened to them in consequence. they were rewarded. they were pardoned. and yet to this day, the speaker of the house refuses to hang the plaque honoring the over 150 police officers who defended the people in this chamber. who defend defended the republicans. and i know -- all republicans didn't feel safe that day because i saw them running. i saw them running from the crowd. running in fear. until the president told them that no, that was just -- that was just a tour of the capitol. they all made excuses. all made excuses of what happened that day.

not one of them, not one of those people who ran out of the capitol, ran for safety that day came back to say, oh, they -- they should be held responsible. so now all those people have been pardoned. talk about crime in d.c. and holding people accountable. and feeling safe. and you think that day was making democracy great again? when the elected leaders had to hide? being chased out of this chamber, doing the people's business. that's an example, that's an example of how the republicans are going to bring the rule of law to d.c.? give me a break. give me a break. you've got to be kidding me. and to this day, you know, we have a lot of the officers,

officer sicknick, his family, and a lot of families. there were three officers that eventually died of causes related to the attack on the capitol on january 6. and they would hope that the people saved that day might be grateful. those families lost their husbands, their father, their sons. and they simply want to have their sacrifice recognized by the people who were rescued. the people who were rescued. law enforcement. and i know there are a number of my colleagues on the other side who have exemplary careers in law enforcement.

they understand better than any. and when you have a son or daughter or a husband or wife who gives their life, gives their life in service of protecting the people in this chamber, you would hope at least just a small gesture, a plaque to commemorate that heroism and that service to their country. but that's not happening. and that's a shame. mr. speaker, i yield. i reserve, i'm sorry. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts reserves. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. mr. comer: mr. speaker, i yield three minutes to the gentlelady from georgia, ms. greene. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for three minutes. ms. greene: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in support of h.r. 2056, district of columbia federal

immigration compliance act, introduced by my good friend, mr. clay higgins of louisiana. bringing in and harboring illegal aliens is not only a crime under federal law, but it is an absolute affront to the american people. as a matter of fact it already says in our law, under title 8, section 1324, that there are criminal penalties for any person who knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the united states, in violation of law, conceals, harbors, or shields from detection or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, such an alien in any place including any building or any means of transportation. this is already our law. but not here in washington, d.c. prohibiting officials from cooperating with federal

immigration agencies and preventing the release of an individual in custody for the purpose of transferring them to a federal immigration agency is shielding and concealing illegal aliens. for my democrat colleagues. sanctuary cities that protect and defend these criminal illegal aliens and by definition if they've broken our immigration laws they are criminals, and they must be held accountable. because of democrat's last four years of wide open borders we experienced one of the greatest national security threats in our entire history as a country. democrats welcomed over 13 million people from all over the world to come across our border and then they made the american people pay for them. this was outrageous. these are people that came into our country, invaded our country, raped our women and children, murdered our own people, and then the cartels

trafficked fentanyl across from china that killed an average of 300 people a day. they set historic records by allowing the highest number of border encounters ever recorded in a single day. that was in a single month. and over three million illegals in fiscal year 2023 which was the highest -- highest ever recorded in a single history, democrats set records. they sure do. they set records. by supporting criminals. to invade our country. instead of protecting our country they defend gangs. take for instance, their favorite ms-13 gang member, carlos abrea who was deported to venezuela for countless

crimes and -- >> i yield to the gentlelady. ms. green: and democrats couldn't wait to go on vacation and pretend they cared about this ms-13 gang member like they actually do. he's now being charged on multiple felony counts for human trafficking. matter of fact, we're thrilled to bring him back and prosecute him and make you guys continue to own him. remember, he's your maryland man. according to the indictment, his transporting of illegals spans decades. and includes children and ms-13 gang members. he's alleged to have participated in more than 100 trips. wow. that's impressive. that's the face of the democrat party. this is who they defend. this is who they fight for. not the american people. not their districts, not

the people's hard earned tax dollars, not obeying the law, they fight for illegals. and i'm proud to support this bill. please, i urge my colleagues to pass h.r. 2056. and with that i yield. the speaker pro tempore: t he gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from kentucky. >> mr. speaker, i might add -- ms. comer: the gentleman ms. green is referencing is two members the house oversight committee requested travel to go down and defend in el salvador. so i think she was very factual in everything she said, especially her criticism. i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: t he gentleman reserves. members are reminded to direct their remarks to the chair. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. >> thank you, mr. speaker. the title of this bill is misleading.

the district of columbia already complies with federal immigration law, including warrants and orders related to immigrants issued by article 3 courts. mr. lynch: it is ironic at the same time that the republican leadership is cutting or denying the ability of the district of columbia to spend $1 billion of the money they've raised within the district to meet their obligations here in the city, and yet while they're cutting their budget by a billion dollars, they're saying, ok, even though federal law doesn't require you to do all this other stuff, we want you to do the federal government's job as well. that's the irony here. so federal immigration law doesn't require the states or cities to

inquire about citizenship or immigration status or manage immigration policy. they don't require cities to do that, especially a smaller jurisdiction like washington, d.c. so what my colleagues want to do is shift the burden of doing the federal responsibilities on to the district of columbia, and their political leadership, at the same time when they're cutting a billion dollars of the budget from washington, d.c. so it's adding insult to injury. mr. speaker, i oppose this bill because i strongly support d.c. home rule. for this reason, at the appropriate time, i'll offer a motion to recommit this bill back to committee. if house rules permit

it, i would have offered the motion with an important amendment to the bill. my amendment would have been the text of senate 1077, the district of columbia local funds act. so i would have tried to put that billion dollars back into their budget, their own budget. i ask unanimous consent to insert into the record the text of that amendment. the speaker pro tempore: w ithout objection. mr. lynch: thank you, mr. speaker. i must note it has been nearly three months since the senate passed the bipartisan d.c. local funds act which would undupe the $1 billion cut to the local d.c. budget in the house republican drafted fiscal year bill. the republican led senate understood immediately the cuts' harms and passed the d.c. local act with introduction by susan collins, the chair on the committee of appropriations. the d.c. budget consists entirely of revenue raised by d.c., raised by the district of

columbia, which is why the congressional budget office concluded the d.c. local funds act would have, quote, zero affect on the federal budget, close quote. for the prior two decades, congress had allowed the district of columbia to spend under its current local budget for the duration of every continuing resolution. however, the fiscal 2025 full year continuing resolution caused d.c. to revert to its fiscal 2024 budget and did so halfway through the fiscal year and in doing so, the continuing resolution sabotaged the d.c. local budget. there was no time to respond. on march 28, president trump called on the house to pass the local d.c. funds act immediately. and last month speaker johnson said the house had been too busy, too busy to act on the d.c.

funds act while it worked on the reconciliation bill, though the house somehow found time to rename the gulf of mexico. the house passed the reconciliation bill may 22, and the house found time this week to take up three bills to overturn the ability of the people of washington, d.c. to govern themselves. the house is now out of excuses on the d.c. local funds act. so i urge my colleagues to join me for voting for the motion to recommit and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: t he gentleman reserves. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. mr. comer: reserve. the speaker pro tempore: t he gentleman reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. lynch: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: t he gentleman yields back his time. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. mr. comer: thank you, mr. speaker.

president trump's electoral mandate includes a promise to the american people the republicans would resolve the criminal illegal alien crisis across this nation. this bill is a necessary step in ensuring our nation's capital is an ally and not an opponent in a fight to end this crisis. specifically, h.r. 2056 represents a important step in codifying president trump's executive order in making the district of columbia safe and beautiful by directing support by supporting the direct enhancement of supporting the local law enforcement with the illegal aliens. i ask support for this sponsored by mr. higgins and yield my time. the speaker pro tempore: p ursuant to house resolution 439 the previous question is ordered on the bill as amended. the question is on engrossment and third reading of the bill. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it.

third reading. the clerk: a bill to require the district of columbia to comply with federal immigration laws. the speaker pro tempore: f or what purpose does the gentleman from massachusetts seek recognition? mr. lynch: mr. speaker, i believe i have a motion to recommit at the desk. the speaker pro tempore: t he clerk will report the motion. the clerk: mr. lynch of massachusetts wants to recommit the bill to the committee on oversight and government reform. the speaker pro tempore: p ursuant to clause 2-b of rule 19, the previous question is ordered on the motion to recommit. the question on the motion. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion the noes have it, the motion is not agreed to. mr. lynch: mr. speaker, i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: t he yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed.

for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina seek recognition? ms. foxx: mr. speaker, by direction of the committee on rules, i call up house resolution 499 and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: t he clerk will report the resolution. house calendar 433, house 499 resolved, that upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the house the bill h.r. 884 to prohibit individuals who are not citizens of the united in in accordance with 10-12a and impoundment control of 1944. all points of order are waived. the bill is considered as read. all points of order against provision of the bill is waived and the

previous question as considered on the bill and any amendment thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one, one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the minority leader or respective designees, and two, one motion to recommit. section 2, the provisions of section 1017 of the impoundment control act of 1974 shall not apply to a bill or joint resolution introduced with the special message transmitted under section 1012 of that act on june 3, 2025. section 3, house resolution 492 is hereby adopted. the speaker pro tempore: t he gentlelady from north carolina is recognized for one hour. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speake. for purposes of debate only, i yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. mcgovern, pending which i yield myself such time as i may

consume. the speaker pro tempore: t he gentlelady is recognized. ms. foxx: during consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for purposes of debate only. and i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks . the speaker pro tempore: w ithout objection. ms. foxx: mr. speaker, i rise in support of the rule and of the underlying legislation. yesterday the rules committee met and produced a rule h.res. 499 providing for the house's consideration of h.r. 4, the recisions act of 2025. this rule provides for consideration of h.r. 4 under a closed rule. the rule provides one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the majority leader and minority leader or their respective designees and provides one motion to recommit. additionally, the rule provides house resolution 492 is hereby

adopted. before we get into the substance of the bill today, i'd like to clear up any confusion about any remarks i made in the rules committee last night. let me be crystal clear, i encourage all members to support the rule before us today. my comments last night were lacking in context. democrats made the argument throughout the hearing that this process is somehow another vote on h.r. 1. that is false. the resolution today makes purely technical changes to protect the privilege of the reconciliation bill as it heads to the senate. it is not a redo or litigation of any underlying policy issues in the bill. let me repeat, there are no policy decisions included in this engrossment correction. that is what the senate

is working through and i look forward to considering h.r. 1 when the bill returns from the other chamber. mr. speaker, house republicans remain on a positive forward-moving trajectory in delivering upon the american people's mandate from november. just a few short weeks ago, we passed the one big beautiful bill act. this week, we're taking up a nearly $10 billion recisions package. and soon we'll be moving into the appropriations process. . discretionary waste is about to be put through the congressional shredder. the american people demand this happens. our colleagues across the aisle will leap to their feet and scream bloody murder about how the waste we're targeting doesn't exist and we're laying siege to everything under the

sun. au contraire. we have the receipts to back everything up. here's just a small sampling of the mind boggling discretionary waste that we'll be slashing in foreign funding. $158 million from the lebanon peacekeeping mission which has been fraught with waste and abuse. as evidenced by its abject failure to contain hezbollah. $3 million for an iraqi sesame street. $833,000 for services for, quote, transgender people, sex workers and their clients and social networkers, end quote, in the paul. and $500,000 for electric buses in rwanda.

these examples barely skim the surface, mr. speaker. there's really no wonder why americans are outraged that their tax dollars are being squandered. it's the american people's money. a single dollar of taxpayer money wasted is $1 too many in our view. then there's npr. i honestly don't even know where to begin on that one. even if someone were to accept the premise that we need to finance a public radio outlet, certainly we can all agree that it simply cannot be npr any longer. pnwr's own c.e.o. testified before congress that she's never seen any political bias at npr. i don't know what reality she's living in, but it clearly isn't

this one. here's the kicker. npr does harbor political bias. it took a $1.9 million grant to, quote, improve objectivity and diverse viewpoints, end quote. there's the proof. and it's a concrete example that npr's c.e.o. was giving false testimony to congress. you either understand that you're biased and need help, apparently in the form of taxpayer grants, or you haven't witnessed any bias. you can't have it both ways. then there's pbs. again. i honestly don't know where to begin. on top of the concrete statistically proven bias against conservatives, republicans, and the trump administration, this is the 21st century.

we have sesame street now streaming on private services. so the taxpayers now subsidizing for-profit companies. we've seen private celebrities like ms. rachel who are engaging in crossovers with sesame street which again leverage taxpayer dollars to concentrate wealth to private individuals. it's clear that we must slash this traunch of wasteful spending and continue down a path to fully restore fiscal sanity in our nation. with that, mr. speaker, i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from north carolina reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to thank the gentlelady from north carolina for yielding me the customary 30 minutes. i yield myself such time as i may consume. mr. mcgovern: before we even get to the rescissions let's be

honest about what's going on here. this isn't just a debate about cuts. because in this rule, republican leadership snuck in a rewrite of their big, ugly bill. that's right. a vote on this rule is effectively a revote on the reconciliation package. a do-over. a desperate attempt by republican leadership to fix the mess they made with their awful tax scam. now when they rushed out through in the middle of the night they included provisions that aren't even allowed under the senate reconciliation rules. and instead of coming clean and holding a straightforward vote on the corrections, they're trying to bury it in this rule for the doge rescissions package, hoping that nobody will notice. think of it like a trojan horse, mr. speaker. let's be clear. the rescissions could be brought to the floor any time. you heard that right. they can be brought to the floor any time. they're privileged. speaker johnson doesn't need

this rule to move them. the only reason these things are being tied together is to trick certain republicans into voting for a bill that they've already said they regret. now it should be said that republicans have an opportunity right now to change the bill before it goes to the senate. last night in the rules committee, we could have voted to strip out the state a.i. moratorium with the reconciliation bill. or we could have dropped the controversial language on contempt some republican members objected to. but republican leadership deliberately decided not to do any of that. they decided that the very stuff their members are concerned about doesn't matter. and instead are entirely leaving changes up to the senate. as if we had no power or influence here in the house. and as the gentlelady from north carolina, the chairwoman of the rules committee said herself last night, during the meet, and i quote, any member who has any

regrets about his or her vote on the first bill has the opportunity to vote no on the rule. she didn't recommend a no vote. but she pointed out the choice. that members have. and i agree with her. members have a choice here. those who didn't like this bill have a choice to stop it right here. in the house. so to all of the republicans who said they regret voting yes for this reconciliation bill, especially those who complained about how much this will add trillions to the deficit and debt, this is your chance for a redo. this is your chance for a redo. vote no. vote no here to stop this big ugly bill from moving to the senate. if you have the courage of your convictions, you will voteno. while republican leadership is busy playing procedure games, trying to slip this through, let's talk about what they're attaching this rewrite to. the republican rescissions package is based on a scam.

a con job. a gift. this is not about actual savings. nor sit about root ought waste, fraud and abuse. this is based on cementing stupid, preposterous, self-defeating doge cuts into law. doge cuts that i might add have already illegally been in place for months when trump administration -- when the trump administration wreaked havoc on our government systems by freezing critical funding. from day one, doge has been one big excuse to reward trump's wealthy donors. gut public services. and follow resources away from programs that help ordinary people and into the pockets of the wealthy and well connected. let's not forget, this is the same doge review that cut off funding to usda bird flu experts in the middle of a bird flu outbreak.

that sent pink slips to the people who secure our nuclear warheads. that gutted the national weather service so badly that right now we might not have enough meteorologists to warn communities about tornadoes and hurricanes. doge was a total, complete, failure. and now republicans want to lock their disastrous cuts into law? come on. that's insane. that's crazy. and look at what these cuts are targeting. funding for global health. for clean water. for food security. for democracy programs. for unicef. for the world food program. for diplomacy, humanitarian aid. for world peace, for christ's sakes. people think our foreign budget is some huge, massive thing. we are talking about something that's 1% of our budget. so please do not come down here and pretend like this is a

serious attempt to cut funding. if you want to go after waste and save taxpayer money, count me in. count me in. you know. i wish my republican friends would express some concern about the fact that their president is spending maybe up to $40 million for a parade of military tanksen his birthday. i mean, really? we're cutting money to save lives in this rescissions package, but $40 million plus, no big deal. as long as donald trump is happy. we should start with the pentagon if we're serious about getting out fraud, waste and abuse. the pentagon which by the way has never, ever passed an audit. never passed an audit. let's look at tax breaks for big oil. can't do that because they write off big checks. let's go after the loopholes for billionaires. let's end the corporate giveaways. no, no, no.

republicans don't want to touch any of those things. meanwhile, the cuts in this rescissions package, these cuts hurt america. they weaken our leverage around the world. they pull back critical funding for our allies. they strip away tools we use to prevent conflict and promote stability. these cuts will lead to the deaths of hundreds of thousands, devastating the most vulnerable in the world. at a time when china and russia and iran are working overtime to challenge american influence this bill says go right ahead. this is china's dream come true. the u.s. pulling back our soft power from around the world. this is self-sabotage, masquerading as savings. and it's not even a lot of money. these slivers of our federal budget, these dollars that generate enormous return by keeping people alive and preventing crises before they happen, that's what this money

does that you're cutting. this isn't just penny wise and pound foolish, mr. speaker. it's like saving money by burning dunn your house so you don't have to pay for the heat. you know, i'd like to think that america's greatness comes from our humanity. it's clear republicans believe that america's greatness is found in our inhumanity. from cruelty and callousness. and i believe everyone can agree that's a truly dark, dangerous, and morally bankrupt place to governfrom. the american people deserve better than this. they deserve smarter than this. they deserve a government that prioritizes what works. not what flatters the egos of billionaires hopped up on ketamine. this rule is a digrace. the underlying bill is a disgrace. i urge my colleagues to vote no and i reserve my time. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. foxx: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. foxx: once again i need to set the facts straight. our colleagues keep flip-flopping on their characterization of cuts to wasteful spending and our campaign to get our fiscal house in orer. at one moment, our spending cuts are so monumental, draconian, the earth is going to standstill. people are going to die. they told us in rules. literally seconds after they said that yesterday, not even minutes later, they tell us that this spending cut is inconsequential. it's a rounding error. it's a drop in the bucket. mr. speaker, what is it? it has to be one or the other. the fact that our colleagues keep twisting themselves in

knots is simply evidence that they're doing everything in their power to hide the facts about this vote. at one minute this is not worth congress' time, this $10 billion return on taxpayer dollars. ated a minute -- at another minute they'll tell us these are draconian cuts they'll oppose with every ounce of strength in their bodies. give me a break. republicans are finally offering taxpayers relief from years of of profligate spending from democrats. again, they expanded the federal government with an unprecedented $11 trillion in spending. $6 trillion of which has been added to the national debt. it's time to end that spending. we're ending it in h.r. 1. we're ending it in this package here today. and we won't stop fighting for

taxpayers. we can cut spending in little chunks and in big chunks. in response to mr. mcgovern's obvious assertions members always have achiest to vote up or down on legislation. be it a rule, authorization, or appropriation. the plain text of the rule provides for consideration of this rescissions package and advances h.r. 1 by adopting the engrossment resolution. since democrats seem to have selective memory, let me remind them and americans that during the 117th congress, very yes lent -- recently, house democrats deemed 29 items total, also included in that number is the engrossment correction resolution they deemed in a rule for the american rescue plan act, which included section and

paragraph strikes. in contrast, republicans in the in contrast, republicans in the 118th congress deemed only two measures. we understand it's a tool of the majority that should be used only when necessary. we all know the democrats opposed h.r. 1. they opposed it weeks ago. and they opposed the engrossment resolution last night on the basis that it advances h.r. 1. and mr. mcgovern is tying himself in knots here. in a dear colleague he circulated, he characterized this rule as repassing h.r. 1 just before he went on to complain that h.r. 1's engrossment is not getting its own vote. nothing was added to h.r. 1.

let me repeat. nothing was added to h.r. 1. every change was technical or simply removed provisions to make sure this bill beautiful bill has its day in the senate. let's remind the american people what the democrats voted against in h.r. 1. democrats went on record against tax cuts for families. against tax relief for tips. against tax relief for senior citizens. they went on record against protecting medicaid by advocating for the enrollment of 1.4 million illegal aliens. they went on record against increasing the quality of life funds for our nation's military families. but we have a rule before us to protect h.r. 1's process in the

senate and restore fiscal sanity to our nation, and the american people need and want us to deliver. with that i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: t he gentlelady from north carolina reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: let me explain it again because i don't know why it's such a tough concept for my american colleagues to understand. two things can be true, right? your doge cuts can be incredibly cruel, which they are, and at the same time mathematically insignificant compared to the massive trillions of dollars you're adding to the deficit and debt because of your reconciliation bill. two things can be true. i don't think it's that hard for the american people to understand. mr. speaker, as we have made clear time and time again, the big ugly g.o.p. tax scam is set to add $3 trillion to the deficit.

$3 trillion. and to be clear, that isn't me saying that, that's the independent nonpartisan congressional budget office, c.b.o. it isn't just c.b.o., every other reputable independent analysis of the bill, including the joint committee on taxation, yale budget lab and penn wharton budget model came to the same conclusion, even the right-leaning tax foundation agrees this bill explodes the deficit, explodes it, and yet here we are with republicans patting themselves on the back because of the trump-doge recision package, a package that in all reality barely makes a dent in the very debt they've ballooned. but since they want to talk about the debt, let's talk about the debt. i want the american people to take a look at this chart, mr. speaker. i want the american people to look at this chart. the red indicates the $3 trillion trump's big

ugly bill will add to the deficit. see this tiny sliver? that's the $9.4 billion the republicans are trying to save through these recisions. to break it down a little bit more, the $3 trillion deficit increase in the g.o.p. tax scam is 320 times bigger than the $ed .4 billion the republicans are trying to descend through these doge cuts. under the tax scam, the c.b.o. says the top 5% of earners will get $1.6 trillion in total kansas cuts, that's 170 times bigger than the $9.4 billion the republicans want to rescind. the republicans are cutting $9.4 billion in

federal spending to try to justify the trillions and trillions of dollars they plan to add to the debt so they can deliver massive tax cuts to their billionaire friends. so these recisions, they're not even a drop in the bucket. they're a drop in the ocean compared to the multitrillion dollar deficit busting bill the republicans are trying to jam through. but just because the sliver on this chart seems small doesn't mean these republican recisions aren't harmful. republicans want to cut $900 million from global health programs, including $400 million for pepfar a bipartisan program created by george w. bush to combat h.i.v. this program has saved more than 26 million lives over the past 20 years. that's not fraud, waste, or abuse. that's a big deal and that's something we should be proud of. not properly funding

weaponfar means people will literally die. that's not hyperbole but the truth, because doge and the trump administration illegally suspended pepfar already earlier this year, tens of thousands of people have already died including thousands of children. it's despicable. and they want to cut $2.5 billion in development assistance that our allies and partners use to build schools, help farmers grow food, clean water projects and to combat poverty and they want to rescind the funding for ukraine and our allies at the border of russia. and they want to completely eliminate federal funding for public tv and radio which are trusted sources of news and educational programming for millions of american households, particularly in rural areas. i don't know what you have against rural areas but those areas will be particularly hard hit by those cuts. it's important to note once again many of these

recisions especially to foreign aid have already started to hurt and even kill people. and that's because the administration illegally froze usaid programs which has threatened the lives of millions of people who rely on this funding to prevent or treat disease, afford food, and access clean water. mr. speaker, i'd like to ask unanimous consent to enter into the record an article by the associated press titled "children die as usaid aid cuts, snap the lifeline for the world's most malnourished." the speaker pro tempore: w ithout objection. mr. mcgovern: more than 50,000 adults and 6,000 infants have died to h.i.v. due to the disruption of pepfar. people are already dying. 29,000 people have died of malaria and tuberculosis because the trump administration froze funding. republicans want to rubber stamp the trump

administration's illegal funding freeze into law and claim they are reining in the debt. as you can tell, mr. speaker, this is a huge load of garbage. this recisions package is masquerading as fiscal responsibility and urge my colleagues to oppose it and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: t he gentleman from massachusetts reserves. the gentlelady from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speake. mr. speaker, this recision package does reduce certain global health accounts by hundreds of millions. but keep in mind that $10 billion has been appropriated for this work in these accounts, making this recision exact and very targeted. the trump administration has communicated it will not reduce funds for treatment in pepfar. rather, it eliminates

programs antithetical to american interests and ones that worsen the lives of women and children. enacting this recision will get this funding stream back to its core mission by refocusing it on protecting health and supporting life-sustaining treatment. what we don't need is the wasteful spending priorities of president biden now exposed by the trump administration. $500,000 for a lesbian justice foundation in canada. $9.3 million to the john snow research and training institute to advise russian doctors on how to perform abortions and gender analysis. $800,000 for strand gender people sex workers and their clients and sexual networks in nepal. $7.4 million for a one health work force

project whose curriculum includes teaching practitioners about, quote, environmental racism and the importance of d.e.i. this spending guise under the terms equity, reproductive health, and family planning stray far from the mission of sustaining life and serve no benefit for the populations they're intended to help. these are wasteful programs financed by the american taxpayer, funded by deficit spending but no longer. this money is better off returned to the treasury and pepfar's integrity is now being restored. and i yield three minutes to the gentleman from south carolina, mr. norman. the speaker pro tempore: t he gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. norman: thank you, representative fox. i rise today in strong support of h.r. 4, the recisions act of 2025, a bill that finally codifies the spending cuts identified by the department of government efficiency, otherwise known as doge.

you know, the american people are getting a front row seat to one party who is perfectly content to bankrupt this country. one party. we will get no votes on this recision package, none from the democrat party. and they had their time when their president who was cognitively, let's say, deficient, where were the cuts? none. they didn't say anything, they didn't stand up for the american people, they were silent. where were our good friends with the $15 million to -- 15 million to 20 million illegals coming into this country and the drugs flowing in and the children were trafficked, where were they? they were quiet and didn't say a thing. they were anti-american. this package is not about tightening belts but cutting loose the dead weight. as congressman foxx just mentioned a few things, let me mention a few

things they'll spend your money for. $3 million for iraqi "sesame street" and $3 million for net zero cities in mexico. what is that? in mexico? $150 million for lebanon peacekeeping operations which failed to contain hezbollah. $135 million for the world health organization controlled by china. this is what they're for. this is how they want to spend your money. with $35 trillion in debt, they'll keep spending on their pet projects. president trump is calling an end to it. of this, we're talking $9.4 billion in recisions and funds that never should have been appropriated in the first place, including $8.3 billion in foreign aid programs, some i just read, $1.1 billion from the corporation of public broadcasting because taxpayers should not be forced to subsidized a left-wing

media operation like n.p.r. and pbs. these cuts are more than symbolic, folks, they are structural and target woke handouts failing to keep the peacekeeping efforts in biden's d.e.i. and climate propaganda campaigns masquerading as humanitarian aid. let me be clear, this does not cut defense or cut social security and this does not cut medicare. this is about rooting out waste, fraud, and abuse. and very simply, putting america first which they are not doing. if we don't codify these cuts, they will be reversed quietly over time with no vote from this chamber. this recision package is the lock box and makes the doge cuts permanent and ensures the victories that we don't want to get washed away in the next budget cycle. this is our chance to turn temporary discipline -- the speaker pro tempore: t

he gentleman's time has expired. ms. foxx: i give the gentleman an additional 30 seconds. mr. norman: this is about freedom and maintaining america as we've known it in the past. this is about returning the american people to some fiscal sanity which my friends on the left will not do and never have done, particularly in the last four years. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: t he gentleman yields back. the gentlelady from north carolina reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: i don't know where to begin after that, mr. speaker. the gentleman talked about $100,000 here and $1 million there but not a word about the $3 trillion added to the deficit because of the big ugly bill he and the republicans voted for and supported. not a word about all that's going to not a word about all that's going to be added to the debt. i'm looking at a fox news story here, when you referred to the $9.4 billion as a tear drop in

the ocean in your interview. again, i don't know, i don't know what happened you couldn't bring yourself to talk about the $3 trillion you're adding to the debt. mr. speaker, i'm going to urge we defeat the previous question. if we do, i'll offer an amendment to the rule to bring up amendment number 1 to h.r. 4, offered by mr. goldman of new york which would block republicans from zeroing out federal funding that congress has already appropriated for the corporation for public broadcasting. public tv and radio are trusted soros news and educational programming for millions of households across america and are particularly important in rural areas where public stations are often the only sources of local news. that is a $1.1 billion cut, mr. speaker. now let's compare that to the big ugly republican reconciliation bill which adds $3 trillion to the deficit. and includes a provision, get this, includes a provision that republicans have been bragging about that removes a tax on gun

silencers that has been on the books for a century. now according to the joint committee on taxation, the j.c.t., this new tax break on silencers alone will increase our nation's deficit by $1.5 billion. that's more than the $1.1 billion republicans are, quote, saving by eliminating all funding for public tv and radio. let me ask the american people and my republican colleague, is this tradeoff worth it? public broadcasting in exchange for cheaper gun silencers? i mean, really? unless you're an assassin or a hit man, i hope the answer is asounding no. mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to senter is -- to insert the text of my amendment into the record along with any extraneous material immediately prior to the vote on the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. mcgovern: and to discuss that proposal i yield two minutes to the gentleman from

new york, mr. goldman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. goldman: thank you very much to the ranking member. i rise today to speak on my amendment to president trump's reckless and stunningly short sight red sixes package which would among other harmful cuts entirely eliminate federal funding for the corporation of public broadcasting. let's be very clear. this is not cutting waste, fraud and abuse. this isn't trimming around the edges. this isn't the tear drop in an ocean. this is all federal funding for the corporation for public broadcasting which is pbs, npr, and local public television and radio. this is not just an attack, though, on pbs and npr. as so many of my republican colleagues have said. they know full well that more than 70% of this cut will be felt by the local radio and television stations in their own communities and across the

country. these stations use federally funded c.p.b. radio towers and infrastructure to disseminate life-saving emergency alerts. and they don't just inform rural americans about -- and serve news deserts to discuss local news. which of course they do. and they're often the only source of educational programming for children around the country. but they are essential for disaster response and emergency preparedness. 20 states list npr in their emergency response plans. this infrastructure is essential for emergency alerts, geotargeted text messages and first responder communications. but my colleagues know all of this. they know how devastating this defunding will be. even chairman aderholt acknowledged yesterday in the rules committee that these cuts will harm his state's public broadcasting networks and he would like to work on it with

democrats. well, your chance is right now. on the previous question. which if you vote no, we can work together on funding the corporation for public broadcasting. mr. mcgovern: i yield the gentleman 30 seconds. mr. goldman: this is not fund, this is caving to donald trump's thin skin and his inability to deal with facts rather than to stand up for local station, local communities and the first amendment which specifically prevents congress from abridging the freedom of the press. so to every republican listening, this is yet another chance to oppose donald trump's attack on any objective form of accountability and do what's lest for your constituents. i urge my colleagues to vote no on the previous question and choose your constituents over donald trump. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts reserves. members are reminded to refrain

from engaging in personals toward the president. the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, the public broadcasting act of 1967 mandates that all public broadcasting programs must demonstrate strict adherence to objectivity and balance in all programs. there's a myriad of statistical studies that prove they are not. npr banned coverage of the hunter biden laptop story claiming it was a, quote, mere diversion, end quote. pbs made 162 references to far right versus only six references to far left. perhaps most damning for npr is the fact that they had to utilize a $1.9 million federal grant to improve objectivity and diverse viewpoints last year. the problem with the public

broadcasting act is that it lacks an enforcement mechanism so we'll go with our constitutional prerogative here's to enforce the law and it starts with this rescission of funding. pbs and npr will continue to pivot their response to this cut back and forth as they have for some time. they tell us that they're taxpayer funding gift is just a drop in the bucket, not worth our attention. nothing to see here. but when we want to hold them accountable, it's the end of the world. they'll weaponize their content against congressional republicans, they'll hire lobbyists, they'll buy ads. in fact, they have. they can continue to do that. but thankfully it won't be subsidized by the taxpayer any longer. and with that, mr. speaker, i yield four minutes to my distinguished colleague from texas, mr. roy. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. roy: i thank the speaker. i thank the chairwoman, my friend from north carolina. i support this rule and i rise in support of the rule. the american people watching

back home, we're here because on june 3, the house, the house of representatives received a rescissions request from the white house. to eliminate $9 billion in unobligated spending. let's just say there's much more to go. this is step one. under the act, once the request is received, the congress has 45 days to react. we are now acting. these rescissions are in part because of what doge was able to uncover. look what we've been funding with taxpayer dollars. $6 million for net zero cities in mexico. $5.1 million for programs to strength b the resilience of lesbian, guy, bisexual, intersex and queer, good grief, global movements. $1.5 million to advance diversity, equity and inclusion in serbia's workplaces. $million for moroccan pottery classes. $2 million for sex changes in guatemala.

$33,000 for being lgbt i -- i can't even keep up with this stuff. $6 million to fund tourism in egypt. $32,000 for transgender comic books in peru. $1 million to help disabled people in tajikistan become climate leaders. is that what you think your taxpayer dollars should go toward? i can promise you that the people i represent think this is absolute garbage. how on earth can you possibly defend that? yet my friends on the other side of the aisle would like you to believe seriously that if you don't use your taxpayer dollars to fund this absurd list of prompts and thousands of others i condition even list then somehow people will die and our global standing in the world will crumble. let's just reject this now. the white house is right to send up this rescissions package. this should be just step one. there should be numerous other steps. we should rescind billions upon billions of dollars of wasteful

spending that are destroying our country through inflation, and through increasing the size and scope of government, undermining the safety and security of the american people. how about the $160 million we can save by not giving more money to onra, the organization whose own employees participated in hamas' slaughter of israeli citizens on october 7 which we now know to be verifiably and completely true. why would we continue to shovel money to an organization like that that is funding terrorism against our allies and against our american citizens? yet that is precisely what my colleagues on the other side of the aisle would wish us to continue to do. let's address the big beautiful bill issue. our friendsen the other side of the aisle are raising the prospect of $3 trillion of additional deficits. i have been very open in my belief that this bill should be better. that we should cut more spending. that we should be more mindful of reducing the size of government to get deficits down

much further than we're seeing in this bill. but to be very clear and we had this debate in the rules committee, what my friends on the other side of the aisle are forgetting and not putting forward here in this debate when they say $3 trillion of additional deficits is what you believe the growth rate will be if you adopt policies that will actually increase economic growth. which is putting more money in the pockets of the american people and deregulating so that businesses can create wealth. we assume 2.6% economic growth. that's higher than the c.b.o.'s expectation at 1.8% but lower than historic growth at 3.2%. we hit the sweet spot. we believe if you get that growth you'll have deficit neutrality and end up creating wealth, creating job, putting more money in people's pockets and try to -- and the application of medicaid work requirements to make sure people aren't getting benefits when they should be working. we believe it's a good bill.

5 more seconds? ms. feather: i yield the gentleman 15 more seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. roy: we believe it is a good bill. i think the bill can get better. i think the senate should improve it. we should find more savings. to say to the american people that it's creating deficits, ignoring economic growth is simply not true. with that, i will yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman is recognized. mr. mcgovern: wow, mr. speaker. that's something. you know, we're trying to keep up with the gentleman as he was ticking off all the initiative he is doesn't like. looking at these accounts they added up to $23.5 million. i don't know about some of the programs that he talked about. happy to look into i them. but he came up with $23.5 million in program he is doesn't like. i just want my friends to understand. that's half, that is half of what donald trump is going to

spend on his parade, one-day parade, on saturday. that's half. so, i mean, give me a break. and then the gentleman talked about, you know, that, oh, the c.b.o. doesn't assume growth rates. not only did the c.b.o. take into account the growth rate so did every other think tank that did a budget analysis on the great big ugly bill that republicans passed. and i should also say to the gentleman, and to the gentlelady, many of these programs are already -- have already been halted illegally by the trump administration. just for the record, it is estimated that over 107,000 adults have died as a result of the denial of funds and over 224,000 children. i'm ashamed that our government

has pulled funding for programs that save people's lives. and maybe my friends think that's fraud and waste and abuse, i don't. people are already dying. people are already dying because the trump administration has illegally halled funding for many of these programs. just withholding the money from usaid. i'm happy to share with them the statistics and with that, i reserve my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts reserves. the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker, i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman is recognized. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i want to also point out for my colleagues that, you know, the big ugly way in which republicans have advanced this big, ugly bill is just the tip of the iceberg. last congress, the republican majority presided over the most unproductive, dysfunctional congress in modern american history. what an achievement. i know they're all proud.

republicans shattered their own record by issuing 115 closed rules, meaning 115 times where the house could not debate a single amendment on the house floor. did they learn anything from being the most unproductive congress in history in of course not. in just five months the republicans have racked up over 50 closed rule, more than 90% of the bills they bring up, no amendments, no discussion, no input. just take it or leave it. i mean, what are we even doing here? republican leadership has blocked over 800 amendments and we have yet to see a single bipartisan amendment make it to the house floor this year, not even one. . 14 amendments have been received and they block the ideas they receive. mr. aderholt said the recisions bill gives us

the ability to vote up or down whether to support public broadcasting. no, it doesn't. it doesn't have separate votes. you take the whole package or leave it. we can't even vote on the individual cuts that are part of this recisions package. republicans have blocked debate on amendments that would help states protect against deadly wildfires and post disaster recovery. they blocked amendments to support new mothers and infants impacted by substance abuse and blocked amendments to protect snap and medicaid for millions of americans. no wonder why no one likes congress. republicans are happy to debate trivial issues passionately but important ones not at all. mr. speaker, here's the kicker. at this point in our majority, democrats gave republicans more chances to debate their ideas than their own leaders do. in five months, only six of the 220 republicans in this chamber have had amendments made in order. that means over 97% of

republicans have not had a single amendment debated. are my recollect colleagues proud of being excluded from the legislative process. and again to the gentleman from texas who just spoke, i'm sorry, i don't -- don't lecture us about deficits when you voted for a bill that added $3 trillion to the deficit. i mean, it's shameful. the so-called budget hawks around here who talk a tough game and then they cave. yeah, we had a debate in the rules committee last night but the gentleman was absent. with that i reserve my time. the speaker pro tempore: t he gentleman from massachusetts reserves. the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: i think my colleague from texas, mr. roy, explained very well why we are not voting to increase the deficit by $3 trillion. and we all know that that is coming from the fact that we are

extending tax cuts that were passed in 2017. and by the way, if we go back and look at the record at all the scare tactics and all the armageddon comments that were made when we passed the tax cuts and jobs act in 2017, we hear the same things. none of those things happened. in fact, we had a booming economy. so i don't think the same scare tactics are going to work again. with that i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: t he gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, every major organization that does budget analysis says that they're going to add trillions to the debt. the only people that don't are the gentlelady from north carolina. i'm sorry, i didn't know that you do independent budget analysis, but every other one does. there's one republican in the house who is not afraid of mr. trump and

that's mr. massie. let me read a couple tweets he posted. he writes, why didn't trump's tax cuts and jobs act make tax cuts permanent? he writes because the impact of the tax cuts on the debt after 2025 was understood by them to be too great so now they're employing new math to claim renewing the tax cuts without cutting spending won't impact the debt. he writes, hidden inside of a resolution we will vote on today to bring recisions to the floor is in order to pass h.res. 492 without a vote. h.res. 492 changes the text of the big beautiful bill after it already passed the house. sneaky. sneaky. so look, again, i mean, can we at least be honest about what's happening here? at this time i'd like to yield two minutes to the

gentlewoman from new mexico, ms. stansbury. the speaker pro tempore: t he gentlewoman is recognized. ms. stansbury: i rise to oppose this harmful recision package. the g.o.p. is canceling $9.4 billion, yes, billions for funding in programs that fund life-saving work across the world. funding for public television and public radio, for agriculture and research jobs in my own district, and to codify the doge cuts the 2/3 of americans 07 -- opposed and their own president asked just two weeks ago of his other cabinet members if they were just total bullshit, a quote from the president of the united states. so i'm here to tell

members of this chamber to vote no on this recisions package. transmitted by the director of the office of management and budget and architect of project 2025, russell voight and the state department put things in motion illegally because they were impounding funds and essentially admitted that in the recisions package because they said it was pursuant to the budget control act. they knew what they were doing was illegal. so now five, six months later, they've transmitted this package to cut $8 billion in programs to save lives of children across the world that would gut u.n. programs and save thousands of lives and to gut public broadcasting. this is a full scale attack on our global

peace and security, the health and welfare of millions of children across the world and on public television. and we will fight back every step of the way. so not only am i a no, i'm a hell no on this package and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: m embers are reminded to refrain from using vulgarities in the house chamber. the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speake. americans are the most generous and most caring people in the world. we've set up lots of programs to save the lives of people across this country, across the world, and we'll continue to do that, mr. speake. and what we're doing here is not going to cause people to be dying if the money is spent the way congress intends for it to be spent.

now, as my democrat colleagues are well aware, reconciliation bills are different from other types of legislation and are prohibited from including provisions deemed as extraneous in the senate. so what we are doing here in terms of the engrossment resolution for h.r. 1 is we are striking a few provisions in the bill that senate parliamentarians concluded would jeopardize the privileged status of the bill in the senate. the house is taking all necessary steps to enable the one big beautiful bill to be considered expeditiously considered in the senate and sent to president trump's desk under the reconciliation process which is what this engrossment resolution does. i also remind the ranking member, my democrat colleagues, when they were last in the majority, they also

utilized a engrossment resolution to strike extraneous provisions from their american rescue plan in 2021. furthermore, mr. speaker, what we are doing with the reconciliation bill and with the recision bill is we're doing everything we can to get our country back in fiscal shape. that's more important to the people in this world than any individual program is. it's important that the united states remain the greatest country in the world and that we reduce our debt and deficit. and that's the focus of republicans. with that i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: t he gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: may i inquire of the gentlelady how many more speakers she has? ms. foxx: we're prepared to close if the gentleman from

massachusetts is prepared to close. mr. mcgovern: how much time do i have left, mr. speake? the speaker pro tempore: t he gentleman from massachusetts has two minutes remaining. mr. mcgovern: i yield myself the remaining time. the speaker pro tempore: t he gentleman is recognized. mr. mcgovern: we heard talk about tightening belts and making tough choices. this bill doesn't make tough choices but stupid choices. these recisions would gut pepfar and saved millions of preventing the spread of h.i.v. it would slash funding for malaria prevention and clean water, for food assistance. these programs are not giveaways, this money is not a handout. these are smart, strategic investments that make america safer and save this government money down the road. every dollar we spend on diplomacy or humanitarian aid can save hundreds or thousands later by preventing conflict, disease, outbreaks,

refugee crises and wars. it eliminates those smart investments and strips away those tools that tells the world at a time it's desperate for american leadership it will walk away and let china and russia and iran fill the power vacuum we leave behind. for what? so republicans can say they cut spending while they protect billions in tax breaks for big oil and billionaire donors? let's be clear, this bill isn't serious about fiscal responsibility. if it were, there would be a recisions package for the pentagon and we'd be debating clawbacks for defense contractors who charge $10,000 for a toilet seat and be looking whether elon musk's companies should be getting massive government subsidies. no, the party of billionaires would rather defund "sesame street" and go after elmo and go after programs that help save lives. and yes, this is about trump's military parade, too. the army estimates it can cost between $25 million to $40 million. so let's do the math.

we're going to kill disaster relief, gut unicef and stop investing in global aids prevention but we're fine with donald trump throwing himself a birthday party with tanks, missiles in the streets like it's north korea. what the hell are we doing here, mr. speaker? this is why people don't trust government. if you want to be serious about budgeting, fine, let's be serious. let's look at where the waste, fraud, and abuse runs rampant. let's audit the pentagon and go after corporate wealth there and big oil handouts. let's close the loopholes that doesn't let billionaires pay taxes. this bill is a conjob, america deserves better, the world needs better. this is a revote on the reconciliation bill. vote no if you're against cutting medicaid and snap. vote no if you -- the speaker pro tempore: t he gentlewoman is recognized. the gentleman is no longer recognized.

ms. foxx: mr. speaker, the house is not in order. the speaker pro tempore: t he gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speake. the answer is clear, the american people gave republicans a mandate to restore fiscal sanity. this recisions package is part of achieving that end. republicans are cleaning up the ruin that the biden-harris administration left this country in. we're taking a fiscal scalpel to waste, fraud, and abuse within the federal government. it's the right thing to do, mr. speaker. with that, i urge my colleagues to vote yes on the previous question and yes on the rule. mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time and move the previous question on the resolution. the speaker pro tempore: t he gentlelady yields

back. the question is on ordering the previous question on the resolution. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker? the speaker pro tempore: f or what purpose does the gentleman from massachusetts seek recognition? mr. mcgovern: i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: t he yeas and nays are requested. those favoring the yeas and nays will rise. the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. pursuant to clause 9 of rule 20, the chair will reduce to five minutes the minimum time of any electronic vote on the question of adoption of the resolution, if ordered. this is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 210, the nays are 204. the previous question is ordered. the question is on adoption of

the resolution. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i ask for a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: a recorded vote is -- a recorded vote is requested. those favoring a recorded vote will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 213, the nays are 207. the resolution is adopted. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. pursuant to section 3 of house resolution 499, house resolution 492 is hereby adopted.

the chair announces the speaker's appointment, pursuant to section 4-d of house resolution 5, the 119th congress, and the order of the house of january 3, 2025, of the following individuals to serve on the governing board of the office of congressional conduct. the clerk: nominated by the speaker after consultation with the minority leader, mr. hice of

georgia.

the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair will now entertain requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. thompson: mr. speaker, request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. thompson: mr. speaker, i rise today to celebrate the exceptional artistic talent of emma, a sophomore at clarion limestone high school, and this year's winner of the congressional art competition for pennsylvania's 15th congressional district. since its inception in 1982, the congressional art competition has offered a platform for young artists across the country to showcase their creativity. more than 650,000 students have participated nationwide and i'm

proud it say that this year's winning entry from our district is a stunning example of that legacy. a painting created using water mixible oils will soon hang in the u.s. capitol along winning entries from across the country. for an entire year, thousands of visitors, guests and members of congress will have the opportunity to view her artwork. this marks emma's second time taking first place in our district's competition. an incredible achievement that speaks volumes about her talent, her vision and dedication to her craft. i'm honored to welcome her to washington, d.c., and look forward to all she will accomplish in the years ahead. congratulations to emma and to all the students who participated in this year's competition. thank you, mr. speaker, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i seek unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, to revise and extend

my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, as prices rise and our economy stalls, this week house republicans are pushing a cruel and a senseless plan to cancel $9.8 billion in funding that congress already passed into law. mr. latimer: the rescission package enacts the extreme and out of touch agenda that includes doge slashing support, reducing support for aids prevention, reproductive health and even public broadcasting. as a member of the foreign affairs committee, i'm particularly disturbed by the io foreign assistance targeting programs that help the most vulnerable people across the world and $9 million for aids relief which has saved 26 million lives. gutting $1.1 million from p.b.s. and n.p.r.

these cuts are being celebrated as savings at the same time that the majority is pushing their big ugly bill that will add $3 trillion to our national debt. it's clear it is pushing a harmful ideology. i will not support it. i yield my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from utah seek recognition? >> i i request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you mr. speaker, i rise to recognize and congratulate the white horse high school team for achieving in the capitol hill challenge. from hundreds of teams, this group finished in the top 10, a truly impressive accomplish many mntsz that talks about grasp of economics and civic engagement.

these students demonstrated discipline and genuine passion for learning. the team members i met along with their teacher. we are immensely proud to have bright and committed leaders representing utah's 3rd strength and represent the character of our community. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from north carolina seek recognition? >> i request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. mr. spe aker, i rise today in opposition to trump's rescission

package which includes an unfathomable 8.2 billion cut to u.s.aid funding. my home state is the fourth largest recipient of usaid funding which puts money into our state economy. this threatens local jobs, weakens our research institutions and undermines the economic stability of communities across my state. in my district alone, the damaging effects of the administration's cuts to usaid are already being felt. thousands of talented professionals have lost their jobs and vital partnerships with our local universities have been terminated. these devastating cuts are not only costing people their livelihoods here at home and putting lives at risk around the world. usaid is a corner stone of our national security, empowering

research across the country and reenforcing america's leadership on the world stage. slashing this funding will be disastrous and hurt communities. and we cannot stand for it. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from guam for recognition? >> i request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, i rise today today with great pride to commemorate the 127th anniversary of philippine independence and honor the remarkable and resilience of the filipino people. the phillipines breaking free from colonial rule. like guam, the phillipines displayed strength and unity. the community has long been a

corner stone of our island, they are health care professionals and business owners. they are our neighbors, friends and family. mr. filipino independence celebrates not just the past but the people who continue to carry its legacy of freedom, unity and cultural pride. i introduced a resolution with representative bobby scott to officially recognize june 12, 2025 as this year's observance of filipino independence. thank you for your countless contributions and lasting impact. happy philippines independence day. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee seek recognition? >> address the house for one minute. without objection. mr. cohen: my father was a

physician. one of the things he was taught in medical school is do know harm. our budgets are doing and exy extensional because of the cuts to research and medical education and our schools will suffer and the number of doctors produced will suffer and not to mention medicaid. do know harm. this bill is a big deadly bill. people will die because of it, because we are not putting money in the n.i.h. that does the research to protect us from alzheimer's parkinson's, diabetes. the n.i.h. is our department of

defense. francis collins left it in good hands. let's keep ourselves -- do know harm. i yield. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? mr. carter: i request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. carter: mr. speaker, i rise today to honor rachel kensall as the georgia teacher of the year for 2026 and led a career as a teacher of agricultural science and extending her involvement. she serves as the chapter mentor of future farmers. she continues to help inspire students to create their philanthropic projects developing future community leaders. her efforts focus on fostering

leadership, collaboration and the sebs of community in the young minds she indicates. as alumnus of the university of georgia, go dogs, she has received awards from the college in recognition of the 2025 milken educator of the year. congratulations, rachel, on well deserved recognition as georgia teacher of the year. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from oregon seek recognition? >> i request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. >> this week, mr. speaker, my office received 100,000th message from the people of oregon's 3rd district. this is incredible, on an average i receive 650 messages and that is been since i have been sworn in.

people in portland are fearful, they fear for their children and neighbors. people want to see courageous leadership that understands the needs of working families. people are working hard and barely making ends meet. they want to know their families will be able to thrive. people want immigrant neighbors to feel safe, housing affordable, schools to be funded and have universal health care they can access. these messages aren't correspondence but marching orders. thank you. keep the emails coming. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from wisconsin seek recognition? mr. grothman: i request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. grothman: over the last couple of weekends i attended two events of the hm omp ng

americans. wisconsin is the third highest hmong population in the country. i like to talk about them because they came here not knowing a word of english. they have largely succeeded. i would like to have a conversation with somebody maybe in the 60's and 70's and i asked how many children, grandchildren, brothers and sisters they have and nephews and nieces. and they came here with big families maybe with 40 or 50 children, grandchildren and nieces and nephews. i asked them how are they doing. how many of these children did not graduate from high school? none. how many of these 40 grandchildren and nieces and nephews had any problems with

the law? none. how many got pregnant out of wedlock. none. they seem to be succeeding despite the fact that they came here with all these supposed disadvantages. i would like to salute the hmong that anybody who comes here can succeed. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from new jersey seek recognition? >> i request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection the speaker pro tempore: without objection >> i rise today to celebrate the life of one of this body's greatest members, the late congressman charlie rangel of new york. there are few men anywhere who have made as large a mark on their community and their government as charlie rangel. charlie rangel led an extraordinary life. he was a decorated korean war

veteran, one of the founders of the congressional black caucus and first black american chairman of the storied ways and means committee. charlie was receive eared. he was loved by his constituents. he carved past that others followed for decades. he was an incredible dresser. in the long history of the u.s. house, 11,000 men and women have served in this chamber, of them just nine served longer than charlie rangel. his death has hit our communities particularly hard. as his son-in-law howard is the long time leader of the village which is a vital resource of our neighbors in the city of patterson. last year i sat with congressman rangel even at 94, he was full

of energy, anecdotes and stories and remained a sharp dresser. i send my condolences to his wife and his son and the rangel family. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new hampshire seek recognition? papadopoulos -- i rise today to urge my colleagues to support the halt fentanyl act when it comes to the floor tomorrow. i have been engaged with experts across the aisle to schedule that it doesn't lapse and made permanent. permanent scheduling will ensure law enforcement he has important tools to hold traffickers and drive down drug related deaths. this is thanks to new hampshire's all hands on deck approach.

treatment to bring down the supply of opioids as well as the demand for them. there is still work to be done including getting this bill across the finish line and restoring treatment and recovery. our communities need the support to save lives and confront addiction head on. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? >> i request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. yievment without objection. >> mr. speaker, i would like to congratulate janet goldson as president of germanic college. she was the first woman to serve as president. throughout her tenure, she has been praised for quality education. from helping nursing students access -- mr. vindman: through their work with health care and remains on the cutting edge and the first

institution to dr. goldiner son has ensured her students are set up for success in the classroom and recognize dr. goldon as a great military mom and raised a great soldier. i wish her well in her next chapter, and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from ohio seek recognition? >> i request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. . . . . >> this summer i hear the drumming, four dead in ohio. got to get down to it. soldiers are gunning us down. should have been done a long ago. what if you knew her and found her dead on the ground. mrs. sykes: how can you run when you know? got to get down to it. soldiers are cutting us down. should have been done long ago. what if you knew her and found her dead on the ground? how can you run when you know?

10 soldiers and nixon's coming. we're finally on our own. this summer i hear the drumming. four dead in ohio. four dead in ohio. four dead in ohio. four dead in ohio. mr. speaker, those are thelerrics to the -- the lyrics written after the national guard was deployed at kent state university, killing four students and wounding nine others. as a bright-eyed 17-year-old, i started college at kent state yoort and i live -- university and i lived in presentities hall and in the parking lot lies a memorial where each student who was killed by the ohio national guard died. it's still there. and it serves as a reminder to all who pass by of what happens when you deploy the military against its own citizens. the lives of allison cross, william schroeder, jeffrey miller and sandra sure were cut too short. but should not be in vein. because we know the consequences of what happens when the national guard is deployed against its citizens.

tragedy. four dead in ohio. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from ohio seek recognition? ms. kaptur: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to attach to the record additional materials. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. kaptur: mr. speaker, i rise today to honor the life and legacy of jonathan ford orser. he was a devoted family man, public servant, community pillar and proud son of northwestern ohio. born into the ford family whose vision helped build northwest ohio's glass manufacturing legacy, john orser lived a life shaped by service to his family, his country, his city and his neighbors. from his time in the u.s. marine corps, which he didn't have to

do, to his diplomatic service in africa, and his amazing leadership as mayor of perriesburg, ohio, john never seized working for the greater good -- ceased working for the greater good. he brought new life to his hometown of historic perriesburg, ohio. he nurtured the arts as a generous benefactor of toledo symphony, and its zoo, and preserved the history for future generations to come. he was unselfish. his legacy includes more than buildings or institutions, his lasting legacy lives in the lives of people and communities he inspired time and time again. john's deep commitment to civic duty, his boundless generosity and his reverence for tradition, marked every chapter of his productive 83 years. we offer our deepest condolences to his beloved wife and first mate, deborah, who walked in life with him every step of the way. may she and his enormous extended family, numerous

friends and all who cherish his memory be blessed with gratitude and memory of a generous, kind and patriotic american who left his community and america a better place. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: thank you. for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? mr. tonko: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. tonko: thank you, mr. speaker. in 2017 the united states ranked 14th in the world for solar panel manufacturing. today we're third. this happened in large part due to congress providing long-term certainty for tax incentives to both produce and deploy american-made energy technologies. clearly this strategy is working. but the republicans' big, ugly tax scam is putting hundreds of

thousands of american energy jobs at risk. the uncertainty caused by this process has already resulted in over 62,000 jobs being lost or threatened. repealing these tax credits won't stop people around the world from driving e.v.'s or using solar. but it all but guarantees they'll be using chinese technologies. if china's the big winner, american consumers are the big losers. if their credits are functionally repealed, the average american could see their utility bills rise by hundreds of dollars per year. this is a lose-lose. it's bad for people's wallets. it's bad for building a strong, competitive economy. it sells out current and future generation to fund tax cuts for billionaires. i urge the senate to reject this disgusting abomination and with that, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: thank you. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from illinois seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute.

ms. budzinski: thank you. i rise today to honor robert jones, the chancellor of the university of illinois in urbana-champaign, who is stepping down to take on a new role as president of the university of washington. i would also like to congratulate dr. charles lee isbel jr. who has been appointed as the new chancellor. as a proud alum of the university of illinois, i have sincerely enjoyed working with chancellor jones during my time in congress. a crop physiologist by trade, chancellor jones made history in 2016 when he became uiuc's first black chancellor. throughout his tenure, chancellor jones helped launch a new program to provide free tourition to low-income students -- tuition to low-income student, oversaw the start of the carl illinois college of medicine, and grew the university's profile as one of america's top research institutions. he's partnered with the j.j.k. foundation in east st. louis on their new food, agriculture and

nutrition innovation center. chancellor jones, thank you for your dedicated leadership. i wish you all the best. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: thank you. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from maryland seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, this week the majority is attempting to take back appropriated funds for important core initiatives like the corporation for public broadcasting and humanitarian foreign aid. mrs. mcclain-delaney: this is a terrible decision. one that undermines our national security, our global health, and our cognitive and emotional development. let's be clear. foreign aid is not a handout. it is a strategic investment that helps secure u.s. interests, prevent unrest, and combat disease and famine. moreover, most of my career i focused on children's online safety and digital learning. for rural communities like those

in western maryland where i represent, pbs provides trusted news and educational programming. free of charge. our neediest families often lack access to broadband and can't afford the charges. they simply cannot be able to stream netflix. instead they rely on shows like "mr. rogers" and "sesame street" to teach their kids about the world and how to read. draconian budget cuts like the rescission package cut programs that strengthen our communities, our national security and take critical learning resources from our kids. american families deserve more. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: thank you. for what purpose does the gentleman from rhode island seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. magaziner: mr. speaker, i rise today for the 20th time to demand that the trump administration restore funding for life-saving food aid around the world. now, today i want to talk about

promises. because since the trump administration paused funding for emergency food aid through usaid five months ago, we've heard a lot of promises. elon musk tweeted that emergency food aid would be restored and he even mentioned the name of a factory in my district that makes plumpy'nut, a type of emergency food aid. secretary of state marco rubio, multiple times, has said that emergency food aid will be restored. he said it in his confirmation hearing. he said it just a few weeks ago in front of the house foreign affairs committee when asked by my colleague from rhode island, representative amo. and just yesterday the state department told fox news that they have a plan to restore this funding. but, mr. speaker, it has been five months. every day that goes by is another day that children around the world are going hungry and starving to death because this aid has been held up. i will continue to speak on this house floor every day until the administration honors its

commitment to restore this aid. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: thank you. does the gentleman have a motion? mr. magaziner: i move that the house do now adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted. accordingly, the house stands adjourned until 10:00 a.m.

the parade will showcase and aerial flyers and timeline of u.s. history. the enlistment and reenliftment featuring president trump and parachute jumps, a live concert and finale with fireworks. watch the 250th anniversary parade saturday at 6:00 p.m. on c-span, c-span or online at c-span. org. >> house democratic leader